Skip to content

Jammu and Kashmir Court August 1971 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.

Aug 26 1971

Station Manager Indian Airlines Vs. State

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Decided on: Aug-26-1971

Reported in: 1971CriLJ1796

ORDERS. Murtaza Fazl Ali, C.J.1. The petitioners have in both the case's entitled above been convicted Under Section 94 of the M.V. Act for not having renewed the Policv of insurance as required by the Act.2. It appears that the accused admitted before the trial court that the previous insurance had expired on 31-3-71 and an application for renewal of the same was made and an order for renewing the policv was made on 6-4-71, renewing the insurance with effect from 1-4-71. The courts below were of the opinion that as the vehicles remained ' uninsured from 31-3-71 to 6-4-71. the offence was technically complete and the petitioners had to be convicted. I ami however, unable to agree with this view. The courts must take a reasonable view of the matter. It is manifest that after the expirv of the insurance policv or the license the owner of the vehicle has to apply for renewal which takes a lew days and if the renewal is made retrospectively then in the eve of law the license or the insuran...


Aug 04 1971

Ghulam Mohd. Dobi Vs. Mst. Noora Bibi and anr.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Decided on: Aug-04-1971

Reported in: 1971CriLJ1628

S. Murtaza Fazl Ali, C.J.1. This is an application against an order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Srinagar allowing the application of the applicant wife and granting a maintenance of Rs. 30/- per month to her and a further maintenance of Rs. 20/- to petitioner No. 2, the infant child.2. The applicant's case before the trial court of the CJM was that she was the legally wedded wife of the petitioner husband and had a child about was years old, that the petitioner had been ill-treating her and had ultimately driven her out of the house after snatching away all her ornaments and assaulting her and since then he liad been negligent and paying nothing to tier for her maintenance as also that of her infant child.3. The application was resisted by the petitioner husband on the ground that as the wife refused to live with the husband or to maintain matrimonial relations with him, he was forced to contract a second marriage and the wife simply refused to live with him, although the h...


  • ‹ Prev
  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial