Who is Abdul Malik, key accused in Haldwani violence?

Nainital Senior Superintendent of Police Prahlad Narayan Meena had earlier said that the “illegal construction” had been carried out by Malik, and he had also led the protests against the demolition.

Talking to The Indian Express, High Court lawyer Ahrar Baig, who is one of the two counsel in a family’s petition against demolition, said, “Last year, when eviction notices were served to families in the Banbhoolpura area following an order by the Uttarakhand High Court, Malik provided free of cost legal assistance to several people. That provided him a huge amount of public sympathy.”

In January last year, more than 4,000 families near the Haldwani railway station were served eviction notices following a court order. Tensions escalated when hundreds of people, mostly women, came out on the road asking for the process to be stopped. The protests only came to an end after the Supreme Court put on hold the Uttarakhand High Court order.

Islam Hussain, a former journalist who has known the family for years, said Malik often takes up work on private contracts, including government projects.

In January last year, more than 4,000 families near the Haldwani railway station were served eviction notices following a court order. Tensions escalated when hundreds of people, mostly women, came out on the road asking for the process to be stopped. The protests only came to an end after the Supreme Court put the order on hold.

Islam Hussain, a former journalist who has known the family for years, said Malik often takes up work on private contracts, including government projects.

“His family was once nomadic, with a business related to horses. They have been around for as long as the town. When the British first arrived, they needed a supply chain and the family’s horse business came to their aid. Their wood business also granted them prosperity,” said Islam.

He said the Abdullah building in Haldwani, which belongs to the family, was once the largest in the locality. The now-demolished Mariyam Mosque, built around 18-20 years ago, was another prominent landmark that emerged as the namaz-sthal for around 100 people.

The case

Earlier this month, in a writ petition filed with the Nainital High Court, Malik’s wife Safia asserted that the origins of the case concerning the disputed property – where the mosque and madrasa once stood – can be traced back to a lease of Nazool land for agricultural purposes granted in 1937 by the British government to Mohammad Yasin for an area of 13 bigha 3 biswa located in Company Bagh, Haldwani.

Nazool land is owned by the government, but most often not directly administered as state property.

Subsequently, Yasin sold the property to Akhtari Begum and Nabi Raza Khan, who then gifted it to Safia’s father Abdul Haneef Khan through an oral gift (hiba) during their lifetime. Gaus Raza Khan, son of Akhtari Begum, purportedly acknowledged this property transfer and gift in an affidavit on January 31 this year.

In 2007, Akhtari Begum and Nabi Raza Khan filed a writ petition seeking mandamus from the High Court to direct the State and the Nainital District Magistrate to issue suitable orders for grant of freehold rights. The High Court disposed of the petition in August that year, directing the then District Magistrate to decide on the application.

Meanwhile, Safia said her father Abdul had passed away in 2013, and she inherited the property in question through succession. She contended that following the 2007 court order, the petitioners attempted to pursue the freehold of the property but encountered obstacles with the Nazool Department, resulting in the matter not progressing further.

Safia informed the court that in 2020, a notice was served to her husband, who promptly responded to it. However, despite his response, certain classrooms of the madrasa on the site were demolished on December 28 that year without considering the reply. Subsequently, she submitted a representation detailing the property’s background and requested permission to repair the rooms.

She explained that Madrasa Abdul Razzaq Zakaria, which was being operated for charitable purposes for underprivileged children on the aforementioned land, faced an attempt of forcible possession by the Nagar Nigam authorities on January 27 this year, without prior notice or an opportunity for a hearing.

On the night of January 30, a notice was issued under provisions of the Nazool Policy of Uttarakhand of 2021 and 2009, as well as the Municipal Corporation Act, instructing the vacation and demolition of the property by February 1. Failure to comply would result in the Nagar Nigam forcibly demolishing it and assuming possession, the notice stated.

Safia’s petition stated that she had filed a representation with the District Magistrate of Nainital, calling for the issuance of orders to dispose of the freehold application. It was requested that until then, the Nagar Nigam Haldwani should be prohibited from interfering with the building and the land.

Official line

Nainital District Magistrate Vandana Singh had earlier told the media that the property, where the two structures were situated, is registered as Nagar Nigam’s Nazool land, and the notice of January 30 required the encroachment to be removed within three days or for ownership documents to be provided.

“On February 3, several locals visited the Nagar Nigam to discuss with our team. They submitted an application and requested time to appeal to the High Court, agreeing to abide by the court’s decision,” the DM said, emphasising that more time was not provided then because sufficient time had already been given.

“That night, our forces conducted a flag march in preparation for the demolition the next day. However, locals presented a 2007 High Court order issued to the DM of Nainital regarding the disposal of an application. Unable to verify the legality of the disposal, we postponed the demolition to ensure adherence to proper legal procedures. We sealed the structure known as the madrasa with consensus, confirming it was unoccupied,” she explained, noting that all legal formalities were completed before demolition.

“The following day, after the 2007 order was disposed of in our office, the concerned party sought a stay on the notice from the High Court. After a two-day hearing, the High Court declined to grant any relief to the petitioner. Since our preparations for the demolition were already finalised, we proceeded with the drive,” she said.

As per information collected by The Indian Express, while the High Court did not give any immediate relief to the petitioner in the matter, it listed the matter for February 14 this year.