Mehbooba Mufti refutes charge of being Roshni Act beneficiary; threatens to sue ex-J&K Guv

PDP supremo Mehbooba Mufti on Wednesday threatened to sue ex-Jammu and Kashmir Governor Satya Pal Malik for his statement on the Roshni Act. In a video shared by Mufti on Twitter, Malik who is now the Meghalaya Governor is heard saying that the PDP president was the beneficiary of the Roshni Act. Dubbing this allegation as "false", she called upon him to withdraw his remarks failing which she would take further legal recourse. 

"Farooq Abdullah introduced the Roshni Act stipulating that we will give away the government land at reasonable rates and we will improve the electricity situation from the funds accrued from this. The electricity situation did not improve but plots were given to Farooq Abdullah, his son and Mehbooba. When people complained to me about this, I obtained information and ascertained that this was true. I cancelled the allotments and constituted an inquiry," Satya Pal Malik was heard saying in the undated video. 

What is the Roshni Act?

Reportedly, hundreds of acres of forest and state land in J&K have been illegally transferred to influential persons under the Roshni Act, i.e the Jammu and Kashmir State Lands (Vesting of Ownership to the Occupants) Act, 2001. On October 9, 2020, a division bench of the J&K High Court led by Chief Justice Gita Mittal declared this law unconstitutional. Moreover, it also asked the government to publish details of all influential persons who have derived benefits under this law on a website.

BJP has accused top politicians such as NC chief Farooq Abdullah, ex-Finance Minister Haseeb Drabu, Congress leader Majeed Wani and former Home Minister Sajjad Kitchloo of being the beneficiaries under the Roshni Act. On January 25, a three-judge SC bench comprising Justices NV Ramana, Surya Kant and Aniruddha Bose adjourned the hearing on the appeals against the J&K HC's Roshni Act verdict. This was done in the wake of the fact that several review petitions are pending before the HC.

Complaining that the HC had not given them the opportunity of a hearing, petitioners have argued that they were being deprived of their rightful property. They put forth the contention that the judgment affected both the land grabbers as well as the lawful occupants. Representing the J&K government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta assured the court that no coercive action will be taken against the petitioners during the time period.