Molla Nasiruddin v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Case No.HCAL 190/2025[2026] HKCFI 5385

Court

High Court CFI

Date25 Sep 2026

Judge—

Case Document

100%

HCAL 190/2025

[2026] HKCFI 5385

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 190 of 2025

BETWEEN

	Molla Nasiruddin	Applicant
	and
	Torture Claims Appeal Board/	Putative
	Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office	Respondent
	and
	Director of Immigration	Putative
		Interested Party

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review

NOTIFICATION of the Judge’s decision (Ord. 53 r. 3)

Following;

consideration of documents only; or

consideration of documents and oral submissions by the Applicant in open court;

Order by Deputy High Court Judge To:

1. Application to withdraw the application for leave to apply for Judicial Review (“Form 86”) be granted; and

2. Application for leave to apply for Judicial Review be withdrawn.

Observations for the Applicant:

Introduction

1.This is the Applicant’s application by Form 86 filed on 15 January 2025 for leave to apply for judicial review (the “leave application”) of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office (the “Board”) dated 20 December 2024 dismissing his appeal against the decision of the Director of Immigration refusing his application for non-refoulement protection (the “Decision”).

2.On 11 September 2026, the Applicant filed an affirmation applying to withdraw his leave application. His reason for withdrawal is that he does not have any objection against the decision of the Board.

3.Reading the decision of the Board and all the papers, there is nothing to suggest that his decision to withdraw his leave application was made otherwise than out of his own free will and with full understanding of the consequences of the withdrawal. As he now claims he has no objection with the decision of the Board, there is no ground to support the leave application. This Court is therefore of the view that his decision to withdraw is an informed and conscious decision voluntarily made. Hence, it allows his application for leave to apply for judicial review to be withdrawn.

Dated the 25^th day of September 2026

( Seline Sze )
for Registrar, High Court

Where leave to apply has been granted, Applicants and their legal advisers are reminded of their obligation to reconsider the merits of their application in the light of the Respondent’s evidence

Notes for the Applicant: If leave has been granted, the Applicant or the Applicant’s solicitors must:
a) serve on the respondent and such interested parties as may be directed by the Court the order granting leave and any directions given within 14 days after the leave was granted (Order 53, rule 4A); b) issue the originating summons within 14 days after the grant of leave and serve it in accordance with Order 53, rule 5; and c) supply to every other party copies of every affidavit which the Applicant proposes to use at the hearing, including the affidavit in support of the application for leave (Order 53, rule 6(5)).		Sent to the Applicant on 25/09/2026 Molla Nasiruddin Applicant’s ref. no: Nil		Sent to the Putative Respondent / the Putative Respondent’s solicitors / such Putative Interested Parties as may be directed by the Court / the Putative Interested Parties’ solicitors on 25/09/2026 Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 24201 Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: Department of Justice, Senior Assistant Law Officer (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit 2)

Form CALL-1

Summaries and metadata are generated from the judgment. Report an error