New Delhi, Jul 29: The Supreme Court has dismissed a Jammu and Kashmir administration petition challenging the quashing of an FIR in a corruption case against Bilquis Mir, India’s first female judge for kayaking and canoeing at the 2024 Paris Olympics.
The petition was moved before the apex court challenging the Jammu and Kashmir High Court’s last July order quashing the FIR filed by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) against Mir.
The high court had delivered a scathing rebuke to authorities saying it “seems that the people at the helm of affairs are leaving no stone unturned in harassing such talented people”.
The Jammu and Kashmir administration had moved the top court requesting for condoning delay in filing the appeal against the high court order and exemption from filing a certified copy of the judgment.
While condoning the delay in challenging the high court order, a division bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Vipul M Pancholi dismissed the petition on merits.
“Having heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, we are not inclined to entertain this petition. Hence, the special leave petition stands dismissed,” the order dated July 27 said.
In the strongly-worded 20-page order last year, Justice Sanjay Dhar of Jammu and Kashmir High Court had said it was “alarmed” to note that the ACB has even tried to go into the issue as to whether the answer scripts of Mir in her graduate examination have been properly evaluated by the examiners.
“This attitude of ACB clearly smacks of wreaking vengeance upon the petitioner (Mir). The present case appears to be nothing but a witch-hunt launched against the petitioner by vested interests,” the court had said.
Invoking Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which deals with the inherent powers of the high court to prevent the abuse of the legal process and to secure the ends of justice, the court said the continuance of criminal proceedings against Mir in these circumstances would be nothing “but an abuse of process of law” and quashed the FIR.
Justice Dhar, in his judgement, had referred to a February 16, 2024, letter from vice president of Indian Olympic Association to the chief secretary highlighting the achievements of the petitioner by conveying that selection of Mir to officiate at the Olympics is a matter of pride for the country as a whole and Jammu and Kashmir in particular.
The court had also referred to the communication that it is a celebration and triumph for all women of India that she has achieved what no one else has in over a hundred years of the Olympics.
Coming down heavily on authorities, the court had said this country has produced very few sports personalities and coaches of the level of Mir “and instead of honouring them and celebrating their achievements, it seems that the people at helm of affairs are leaving no stone unturned in harassing such talented people”.
“No surprise that even after more than 75 years of Independence, this country has failed to develop a sporting culture, as a consequence whereof, we have failed to produce sportsmen/women of international standards in proportion to our population,” it had said.
The court had said the attitude of ACB in criminalising non-acquisition of a technical qualification by Mir “speaks volumes about the manner in which we are treating our sporting heroes”.
