Mohammad Maqbool Malik vs aabid rashid and ors on 2 November 2026

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL SRINAGAR Order Sheet Item no.: 41 C.P./71/2024 (SRINAGAR) [ CONTEMPT ] In O.A./716/2023 DATE OF BIRTH M.A./337/2026 MODIFICATION OF ORDER Court No.: 2 No of Adjournment: 11 Order Dated: 02/11/2026 MOHAMMAD MAQBOOL MALIK Vs AABID RASHID AND ORS

For Applicant(s) Advocate : NONE

For Respondent(s) Advocate : RAIS UD DIN GANAI - DAG Order of The Tribunal 01/ The instant contempt petition, wherein, on 09-02- 2026, personal appearance of the Chief Medical Officer (CMO), Kupwara, before the court was sougt, but the order was not complied with, necessitating issuance of bailable warrant to the tune of Rs. 20,000/- to be executed by the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Kupwara, for causing his presence. 02/ Since the earlier bailable warrant was not executed by the SSP, Kupwara, the court was compelled to seek explanation from the said SSP in terms of order dated 22- 09-2026, explaining as to why the bailable warrants issued by this court in terms of its order was not complied with. The court thought it proper to rely upon the judgement of the apex court delivered in case titled as Dr. Sarita Parikh and another versus Unio of India and others, reported in 2011 Legal Eagle, SC 1250, wherein Their Lordships have, inter alia, held '.....the courts having authority to ensure compliance of its orders, can summon the police officials for accountability.' Keeping the command of the apex court, as referred to above, in view as also in terms of article 141 of the Constitution of India, any law laid down by the apex court, is binding upon one and all. 03/ Matter came up for consideration today, the CMO, Kupwara, Shri Zafar Akbar Dar, is present before the court. However, none is present for the petitioner. Presence of the CMO was sought only to seek compliance of its orders as his past conduct was absolutely in violation of the orders passed by the court. The CMO was pointedly asked as to whether he appeared before tthe court today in pursuance of bailable warrant issued by the court, he submitted that he appeared only on asking of the learned DAG and he did not execute any bail bond before the concerned Executing Agency. As such, the court taking a very serious note of non compliance of its order by the SSP, Kupwara, Mr. Rais - DAG, appearing for the Department of Home, was directed to seek appearance of the said SSP before the court in person today itself. In the meantime, the CMO, Kupwara, in view of his statement that he was to attend to an important meeting, was allowed to leave the court for the time being. 04/ The matter was again taken up for consideration at 3.00 PM and learned counsel for the respondents submitted that orders of the court have already been complied with by the SSP, Kupwara, and the bailable warrant as also the bail bond has already been executed by the CMO, Kupwara. In this regard, Mr. Rais - DAG produced the bail bond, in original, before the court, wherein the CMO, Kupwara, has signed it with the assurance that he will cause his appearance before the court on the date fixed. 05/ On persual of the Muchlaka Zamanat and the endorsement of the concerned SHO, dated 28-10-2026, the court was taken by surprise on the conduct of the CMO, Kupwara, as regards making a wrong statement in the open court earlier in the day. Accordingly, Mr. Syed Musaib - DAG, who was present in the court, was asked to seek presence of the CMO to clarify as to why he made a wrong statement in the open court, which statement would have certainly set in motion departmental proceedings against the office of SSP, Kupwara.

06/ The CMO is again present before the court as also the Block Medical Officer, Kupwara, in whose presence the CMO made a false statement before the court earlier in the day. Ordinarily, making a false statement before the court would invite criminal proceedings to be initiated under the relevant provisions of penal law and also for initiating criminal contempt proceedings against the CMO. However, the CMO submited that he only signed the bail bond, which is before the court in original. 07/ We would like to add here that once a bailable warrant is issued to be executed by the concerned police agency, there is a set procedure as to how it is to be executed. What we find is that the Muchlaka Zamanat Nama has not been made in accordance with law. There is no "Shinakht Qunanda" in the Muchlaka, when otherwise, in law, what is required is that bailable warrant was executed with mention of witnesses. We are at pains to say that even the executing agency has not complied with the procedure as was rquired in law. 08/ Before proceeding further in the matter, we would direct Mr. Rais ud din Ganai - DAG, to seek presence of the Tamilee Officer, who has executed the bailable warrant, in person before the court and at the same time, seek compliance of the direction passed earlier by the court, in terms whereof, he was directed to submit the explanation as to why earlier warrant was not executed, for, non compliance of execution of warrants would, certainly, amount to hampering the course of justice, which otherwise would amount to contempt of court coupled with the judgement of the apex court as quoted above. 09/ For the foregoing reasons, let the matter be listed again for consideration on 01-12-2026 at 11.00 AM as Case No.1 in the Cause List. In the meanwhile, the CMO, Kupwara, to comply with the order of the court in its letter and spirit. He shall also submit an affidavit by tommorrow that he will remain present before the court on the next date of hearing. Mr. Rais - DAG is directed to convey this order to the SSP, Kupwara. The record, produced before the court, is tagged with the file in the open court. Prasant Kumar Member (A) M. S. Latif Member (J) Tariq Mota ( ps consultant )