Avinash Azad
In a sensational twist to the political underbelly of Jammu & Kashmir, a relative of former Member of Legislative Council (MLC) Mohd Hussain, who is accused of grabbing thousdands of kanal state and privates land, has filed a petition before the court seeking the imposition of the stringent Public Safety Act (PSA) against the ex-legislator, his son, and his son-in-law—citing a string of at least 10 FIRs registered against the politically influential family.
The petitioner, Manzoor Hussain, a relative of the ex-MLC, has alleged a “pattern of repeated criminal conduct” and urged the court to invoke PSA—typically reserved for threats to public order—against Mohd Hussain and his family members.
According to court documents reviewed by The Hidden News, Manzoor cited criminal cases spanning three decades, including serious charges such as attempt to murder (Section 307 IPC), criminal intimidation, unlawful assembly, and possession of illegal arms.
A Troubling Track Record
The ex-MLC Mohd Hussain himself has been named in multiple FIRs, including:
FIR No. 67/1986 under Sections 341, 343 PRC
FIR No. 144/2006 under Sections 147, 323, 506 PRC
FIR No. 157/2007 under Sections 147, 506 PRC
All three cases have since been closed, but the accumulation of cases over years paints a disturbing picture, the petitioner argued.
His son, Mohd Iqbal, has been booked in at least three criminal cases:
FIR No. 161/2018 under Section 447-A PRC (closed via Final Report No. 63/2029 dated 31/10/2019)
FIR No. 375/2022 under Sections 307, 353, 143, 149, 323 IPC
FIR No. 364/2023 under Sections 307, 341, 147 IPC, and the Arms Act (4/25/A), the last two cases remain under investigation, both involving charges of attempt to murder, assault on public servants, and use of illegal arms.
The ex-MLC’s son-in-law, Lal Hussain, has also been entangled in four criminal cases, including the same FIR 364/2023, under Sections 307, 341, 147 IPC, and the Arms Act (4/25/A). While two FIRs are stayed by the J&K High Court and one stands closed, one case remains under active probe, raising further questions about the family’s alleged criminal entanglements.
Police Response Dismissive
Despite the litany of charges, the local law enforcement appears unconvinced about the need for PSA action. In a report addressed to SSP Jammu, SDPO Nagrota downplayed the severity of the allegations, stating that the issue stemmed from a “land dispute between relatives.” The SDPO also noted that Manzoor Hussain, the complainant, is a co-accused in FIR 375/2022 along with Mohd Iqbal, casting aspersions on the motives behind the plea.
“The accused Mohd Iqbal was not involved in any heinous criminal activity,” the SDPO asserted in the report. Endorsing the SDPO’s findings, SSP Jammu, via communication CRB/2025/7376-79/DPOJ dated 24/01/2025, instructed the Assistant Public Prosecutor (APP) to apprise the court that the accused were not engaged in criminal activities that merit PSA detention.
Political Patronage or Legal Blind Spot?
The case has triggered a fresh wave of debate around selective law enforcement and the misuse of political clout, with legal experts and civil society questioning why individuals facing attempted murder and arms possession charges continue to enjoy official protection and judicial leniency. “If FIRs involving grave offences are not grounds enough for preventive detention under PSA, then what is?” asked a senior advocate on condition of anonymity.
