Jammu and Kashmir Court September 1968 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Karim Bux and ors. Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Sep-27-1968
Reported in: 1969CriLJ907
Jaswant Singh, J.1. These are three applications under Section 491 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Section 104 of the State Constitution for issue of writs in the nature of Habeas Corpus directing the release from detention of the petitioners and shall be disposed of by this judgment as they raise common question.2. The facts relevant for the purpose of these applications are:-In petition No. 3 of 1968, the District Magistrate Jammu by his order dated 14-3-1967 passed under Rule 30(1)(b) of the Defence of India Rules read with Jammu and Kashmir Government Notification No. SRO-149 dated 23-4-1965 directed the detention of the petitioner in the Central Jail, Jammu with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the defence of India, the public safety and the maintenance of public order. The petitioner continued to be detained under the Defence of India Rules as stated above, but on 3-1-1968, in view of the termination of the proclamation of emergency the Stat...
Mohamad Bhat Vs. State
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Sep-11-1968
Reported in: 1969CriLJ747
Jaswant Singh, J.1. The learned Sessions Judge, Srinagar has convicted Mohammad Bhat accused under Section 304 R.P.C. for causing the death of Mst. Khatji, the wife of the complainant, as also under Section 323, R.P.C. for assaulting Qadir Bhat, the complainant. Under the first count, the accused has been sentenced to life imprisonment subject to confirmation by the High Court and under the second count he has been sentenced to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment. The record has been submitted to us for confirmation of the sentence under Section 374, Criminal P.C. and the accused has also preferred an appeal against the conviction and sentences passed on him.2. After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties we are of the opinion, that the reference must be rejected and retrial of the accused ordered because the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge suffers from a legal defect of a very crucial nature.3. The trial of the Sessions case which resulted in the conviction of the a...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›