Add Tribune As Your Trusted Source
TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | ChinaUnited StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
News Columns | Straight DriveCanada CallingLondon LetterKashmir AngleJammu JournalInside the CapitalHimachal CallingHill View
Don't Miss
Advertisement

Case to be heard on March 8 after Judge recuses selfFarooq moves HC over ED order on properties

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

Tribune News Service

Advertisement

Advertisement

New Delhi, March 5

Hearing on National Conference president Farooq Abdullah’s petition challenging an ED order attaching his properties in a money laundering case was deferred to March 8 after a Jammu and Kashmir High Court Judge on Friday recused himself.

Abdullah, former J&K CM, has moved the High Court against the Enforcement Directorate’s December 2020 order. On Friday, Justice Ali Mohammed Magrey recused himself saying he had declined hearing similar cases in the past. Now, the matter will be listed before another judge on Monday.

Advertisement

The ED alleged that Abdullah “misused” his position as JKCA president from 2001-2011 and made appointments in the sports body so the BCCI-sponsored funds could be laundered.

Abdullah said the list of properties — worth Rs 12 crore — attached by the ED in Kashmir and in Jammu were unrelated to the alleged criminal activity mentioned in the final report/FIR and termed it a “continuing violation of his fundamental rights”. Abdullah contended that on the date of the registration of the ECIR (Enforcement Commission Information Report) and the initiation of investigation, the state of Jammu and Kashmir was governed by the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir, 1956, and had special status under Article 370 of the Constitution.

(With PTI inputs)

Advertisement
Show comments
Advertisement