• Date of Document: 30 June 2025
• Time: Unspecified (Date of court hearing and order)
• Incident Type: Receipt and Review of Formal Court Order for Return of Seized Property.
• Document Source: Berkshire Magistrates' Courts (1920), Civic Centre, Reading, Berkshire, RG1 7TQ.
• Case Number: 432500137947
• Parties: Myself (as Applicant), Thames Valley Police (as Respondent).
• Issuing Authority: Julien Vanytghem - Head Of Legal Operations (South East), Justices' Clerk.
• Details of Formal Court Order:
  • Application: The order concerns my "Application for an order in respect of property, namely 1) A Apple iPhone Pro Max (Approximate Value £1062.00 IMEI: 356415755869534) 2) A Apple iPhone 5S (Approximate Value £50) 3) A Samsung 20 Ultra (Approximate Value £300), which has come into the possession of the police. In accordance with section 1 of the Police (Property) Act 1897."
  • THE ORDER: The document explicitly states: "It is ordered that Order made under s1 Police Property Act 1897 for the return of the following items to Waseem Malik - 1x Apple iPhone Pro Max (Approximate Value £1062.00 IMEI: 356415755869534), 1x Apple iPhone 5S (Approximate Value £50) and 1x Samsung 20 Ultra (Approximate Value £300) to be returned to Waseem Malik of 2 Vaughan Gardens, Eton Wick, Berkshire, SL4 6JT"
  • REASON FOR ORDER: The document provides the reason for making the order: "Reason: The Applicant attended but, despite being notified on 06 June 2025, Thames Valley Police did not attend to contest the application."
  • Certification: The document is stamped "Certified as a true copy."
• My Perception of Purpose & Impact:
  • This is the definitive judicial order compelling Thames Valley Police to return all three of my seized mobile phones to me.
  • This is the successful outcome of the hearing on June 30, 2025 (related to my application in Log #357).
  • Crucially, the order notes that Thames Valley Police were notified of the hearing on June 6, 2025, but "did not attend to contest the application." This invalidates their subsequent statement to me at Maidenhead Police Station (Log #484/#486) that they "will contest it," as they already failed to do so at the designated hearing.
  • This document provides irrefutable proof that TVP's refusal to return my phones on July 2, 2025, was a willful and direct disobedience of a valid court order.
  • This is the primary piece of evidence for my Contempt of Court application (N600, Log #488) against Thames Valley Police.
• Context/Link to Other Events:
  • This is the formal order resulting from the hearing on June 30, 2025, which was scheduled by the summons in Log #357.
  • The refusal by TVP officers to comply with this specific order is detailed in Log #484/#486.
  • My subsequent application for Contempt of Court (Log #488) is based on the breach of this order.
  • My notification to the High Court Administrative Court (Log #487) about TVP's non-compliance also refers to the breach of this order.
• Evidence: The "Certified as a true copy" Court Order document itself, dated 30 June 2025, Case No: 432500137947.