fix(hop-nvim): visual-selection related keymapping bug

[std-enigma]

Closes #1629

[github-actions]

Review Checklist

Does this PR follow the [Contribution Guidelines](development guidelines)? Following is a partial checklist:

Proper conventional commit scoping:

• If you are adding a new plugin, the scope would be the name of the category it is being added into. ex. feat(utility): added noice.nvim plugin

• If you are modifying a pre-existing plugin or pack, the scope would be the name of the plugin folder. ex. fix(noice-nvim): fix LSP handler error

• Pull request title has the appropriate conventional commit type and scope where the scope is the name of the pre-existing directory in the project as described above

• README is properly formatted and uses fenced in links with <url> unless they are inside a [title](url)

• Entry returns a single plugin spec with the new plugin as the only top level spec (not applicable for recipes or packs).

• Proper usage of opts table rather than setting things up with the config function.

• Proper usage of specs table for all specs that are not dependencies of a given plugin (not applicable for recipes or packs).

[Uzaaft]

What issue does this solve? Why is it problematic to have this for visual and select mode

[Uzaaft]

Ah this closes #1629.
Please use the template next time @std-enigma . Not all fields needs to be filled