Name: :Waseem: Malik
Status: The Man – OFFICE of the MAN
Case Ref: AC-2025-LON-001909
The King (on the application of Malik) v Berkshire Magistrate Court and other
Role: Litigant in Person
Submission Date: 25 July 2025
Between 30 June and 21 July 2025, two separate court orders were issued relating to the return of property under Section 1 of the Police (Property) Act 1897. These orders are factually identical in subject matter but are judicially contradictory in outcome.
Date | Order Title | Log Ref | Outcome |
---|---|---|---|
30 June 2025 | Certified Court Order – Return of Property | #396 | Ordered return of 3 devices. TVP failed to attend. Judgment in applicant’s favour. |
21 July 2025 | Conflicting Court Order – Refusal of Return | #489 | Denied same request under different case number. No legal basis provided. |
These two rulings contradict the principle of judicial finality and procedural certainty. The Applicant asserts violations of:
“A court cannot both affirm and deny the same right under the same statute without cause. This contradiction is either administrative error or deliberate procedural obfuscation.”
Annex | Title | Source |
---|---|---|
A | Certified Court Order – 30 Jun 2025 | Log #396 |
B | Conflicting Court Order – 21 Jul 2025 | Log #489 |
C | ECHR Evidence Index – Section II.1 & II.2 | Master Bundle |
D | Attachment Note – Article 6/A1P1 Violation Summary | Filing Notes |
I declare the above factual and procedural contradictions under penalty of perjury and submit this affidavit in pursuit of judicial remedy and clarification under case AC-2025-LON-001909 and ECHR filing Ref: 21585/25.
Signed:
:Waseem: Malik
The Man – OFFICE of the MAN
Date: 25 July 2025
Location: Eton Wick, Windsor
Witnessed by: ___________________________
(Commissioner for Oaths / Solicitor / Notary Public)
Would you like this finalised into a PDF bundle for CE-File upload, and simultaneously catalogued into your support_docs / HighCourt / WitnessStatements / Contradiction_Sequence_Bundle.pdf
archive?