Allegedly, Fugitive Zakir Naik Files Article 32 Petition to Club 43 Cases Against Him

In a recent development, fugitive Zakir Naik has reportedly filed an Article 32 petition seeking to club 43 cases against him. This move has been strongly objected to by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who questioned whether a declared fugitive can file such a petition. The matter was brought before the Supreme Court, where SG Mehta submitted his objections.

The news was first reported by Megh Updates on Twitter, with a tweet that included a screenshot of the alleged petition. The tweet read: ” BIG breaking | Fugitive Zakir Naik filed Article 32 petition seeking to club 43 cases against him, SG Tushar Mehta strongly object this move. ‘A declared fugitive can file an Article 32 petition?’, SG submitted before Supreme Court today.”

While the authenticity of the petition and the objections raised by SG Mehta have not been independently verified, the news has sparked a debate among legal experts and the general public. Many are questioning the legal implications of allowing a fugitive to file such a petition and whether it goes against the principles of justice and fairness.

Zakir Naik, a controversial Islamic preacher, has been facing multiple allegations of money laundering, inciting religious hatred, and promoting terrorism. He has been on the run from Indian authorities since 2016 and is currently believed to be residing in Malaysia.

The decision to file an Article 32 petition to club multiple cases against him is seen as a strategic move by Naik to streamline the legal proceedings and potentially delay the trial. However, the objections raised by SG Mehta indicate that the government is not in favor of granting any concessions to the fugitive preacher.

It remains to be seen how the Supreme Court will respond to this development and whether it will allow Naik to proceed with his petition. The case has attracted significant media attention and is expected to be closely followed by legal experts and observers.

For more updates on this story, please refer to the original tweet by Megh Updates: https://twitter.com/MeghUpdates/status/1846433230200635867?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw.

BIG BREAKING |

Fugitive Zakir Naik filed Article 32 petition seeking to club 43 cases against him, SG Tushar Mehta strongly object this move.

“A declared fugitive can file an Article 32 petition?”, SG submitted before Supreme Court today. pic.twitter.com/0IaPNlUX0k

— Megh Updates (@MeghUpdates) October 16, 2024

Can a declared fugitive file an Article 32 petition?

Zakir Naik, a controversial Islamic preacher who is currently a fugitive from justice, recently filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking to have 43 cases against him clubbed together. This move has raised eyebrows and sparked a heated debate in legal circles. The Solicitor General, Tushar Mehta, has strongly objected to Naik’s petition, questioning whether a declared fugitive has the right to file an Article 32 petition.

What is an Article 32 petition?

Article 32 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of fundamental rights. It is considered a powerful tool for citizens to seek redressal for violations of their fundamental rights. However, the question of whether a fugitive can avail of this constitutional remedy is a contentious issue.

Why is the Solicitor General objecting to Zakir Naik’s petition?

The Solicitor General’s objection to Naik’s petition stems from the fact that he is a declared fugitive who is evading arrest in multiple criminal cases. Mehta argues that allowing Naik to file an Article 32 petition would set a dangerous precedent and undermine the rule of law. He contends that individuals who are absconding from justice should not be able to seek relief from the highest court in the land.

What are the implications of this legal battle?

The outcome of this legal battle could have far-reaching consequences for the Indian legal system. If the Supreme Court allows Naik’s petition to proceed, it could open the floodgates for other fugitives to seek similar relief. On the other hand, if the court upholds the Solicitor General’s objection, it would send a strong message that the rule of law must be upheld, regardless of one’s status or influence.

How is the public reacting to this development?

The public reaction to Zakir Naik’s petition has been mixed. Some believe that everyone, regardless of their legal status, should have the right to access the courts and seek justice. Others argue that allowing a fugitive to exploit constitutional provisions for personal gain sets a dangerous precedent. The debate is likely to intensify as the case progresses in the Supreme Court.

In conclusion, the clash between Zakir Naik’s Article 32 petition and the Solicitor General’s objection raises important questions about the limits of legal remedies for individuals who are evading justice. The Supreme Court’s decision in this case will not only impact Naik’s fate but also set a precedent for how fugitives are treated under the law. It remains to be seen how the court will navigate this complex legal terrain and uphold the principles of justice and accountability.

Source: examplearticle.com