Jammu and Kashmir Court February 1986 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.
Krishan Kaur Vs. Kartar Singh
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Feb-26-1986
Reported in: 1988CriLJ717
ORDERS.M. Rizvi, J.1. This criminal reference has been made by the learned Sessions Judge, Bhadarwah recommending that the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Krishtwar dt, 12-9-1983 may be quashed.2. The facts giving rise to this reference may be briefly stated as under:3. The petitioner Krishen Kaur filed an application before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Krishtwar Under Section 488, Cr.P.C. stating therein that, the respondent Kartar Singh was her husband, and three children were born to them out of their wedlock. She lived with him for about 10/12 years and thereafter, he deserted her along with her children. She therefore prayed that, the respondent may be ordered to pay maintenance allowance to her along with her children.4. The respondent in the objections denied the matrimonial relationship with the petitioner, and thereby, disowned the children as well. The learned Magistrate inquired into the matter, and came to the conclusion, that the existence of marriage was not...
Sukh Ram Vs. State
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Feb-26-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1024
ORDERS.M. Rizvi, J.1. This criminal revision is directed against the judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge, Udhampur dt. 16-2-1976, dismissing the appeal of the petitioner against the judgment and order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udhampur convicting him for the offence Under Section 304-A, RPC, and sentencing him to two years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000/-.The petitioner was driving Truck No. 481/JKA on the National Highway on 14-7-1971, and while coming from Udhampur side towards Jammu at Tikri, his truck hit one Devi Dass causing his death instantaneously. One Mangat Ram was also hit and injured. The matter was referred to the police, which resulted in challenging him for the offence Under Sections 304-A, 279 and 337 of the RPC in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udhampur. He was charged for the said offences. He pleaded not guilty. The petitioner was tried and found guilty. He was convicted for the offence Under Section ...
Khazir Dar Vs. Aziz Mir and ors.
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Feb-14-1986
Reported in: 1986CriLJ1632
ORDERG.A. Kuchhai, J.1. This is a reference made by Sessions Judge, Kupwara vide his order dt. 16-10-1985 for quashing order of Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Handwara dt. 16-4-1984. The order impugned arises out of the following circumstances.2. The petitioner initiated proceedings Under Section 145 Cr. P.C. before the S. D. M. Handwara. The learned Magistrate after passing preliminary order attached the property. Finally the Magistrate could not reach to any conclusion with regard to the factum of possession of the property in dispute. He accordingly referred the matter to Sub-Judge Handwara Under Section 146 Cr. P.C. for determining the factum of possession. The Sub-Judge could not reach to any conclusion with regard to factum of possession and returned a negative finding to that extent.3. The learned S. D. M. on receiving the finding from Sub-Judge proceeded on spot and by making a spot enquiry recorded joint statements of two witnesses and arrived at a conclusion that the respon4ent w...
J. and K. Board of School Education Vs. Prem Kumar
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Feb-11-1986
Reported in: AIR1987J& K56
ORDERA.S. Anand, C.J. 1. A confusion (though not uncommon) in the mind of the learned trial Court between the mode of proof and adequacy oil proof of a document resulted in the disallowing of a question put by the petitioner to his witness regarding the authorship of the entries in the School admission register and the consequential Filing of the present revision petition.2. The respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for declaration to the effect that his date of birth is 1-6-1936 corresponding to 20th Jeth, 1993 Bikrimi, He also sought the consequential relief by way of a mandatory injunction to the petitioner-defendant to make the necessary correction in its records. The petitioner-defendant resisted the suit and one of the issues framed in the suit is as to what is the correct date of birth of the respondent-plaintiff. After the evidence of the plaintiff was over, the defendant led its evidence During the course of the defendant's evidence, one of its witnesses produced the original admi...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›