Jammu and Kashmir Court July 1997 Judgments

Kuldip Singh Jamwal Vs. State

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 1998CriLJ790

ORDERBilal Nazki, J.1. This is a case in which the petitioner is in custody for almost one year. He has been charge sheeted for offences Under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471/120-B, R.P.C.2. The petitioner had filed an application for bail earlier also in this Court and this Court while rejecting the bail application had observed :-The accused cannot indefinitely be kept in custody particularly if the trial is to take a decade and if matters like this are allowed to be dragged for decades in a Court of law, the confidence of public in Courts itself gets shakened but presently the Sessions Judge Jammu must be having hundreds of cases and therefore even if he tries his best he will not be able to decide the matter even within five years. Therefore, Government should take the observations made in this order seriously and think of having a Special Court where the accused, if charge-sheeted, are tried on day to day basis and the trial comes to a conclusion in a reasonable period of six mon...

Rajinder Singh Vs. Param Jeet Kaur

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: II(1998)DMC675

G.D. Sharma, J.1. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu has made his reference wherein recommendation is made for quashing the order dated .8.9.1996 passed by the City Judge, Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jammu granting maintenance allowance to the respondent under Section 488, Criminal Procedure Code. The respondent is the duly wedded wife of the petitioner. On 18.9.1996 the respondent made an application under Section 488, Criminal Procedure Code in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu who transferred the same for trial on the same day to the City Magistrate, Jammu who issued process for summoning the petitioner herein. The petitioner resides in Mirpur Colony, Pathankot. It was alleged that on 9.10.1994 the parties were married in Jammu and thereafter they had been living as husband and wife at Pathankot. The respondent after residing there for some time got an employment in a Semi-Government Organisation on ad hoc basis in Jammu and in the month of March, 19...

Mohammad Yousuf and ors. Vs. State of J. and K. and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 1998CriLJ519

A. Quadir Parray, J.1. On 5-9-1996, an order came to be passed by District Magistrate, Baramulla, in exercise of the powers vested in him under Sub-section (2) of Section 17-A of Criminal Procedure Code namely Distribution of business among subordinate Magistrates of the District. In the said order, the District Magistrate, Baramulla has ordered that remand shall be granted by no other Magistrate except the Senior most Magistrate available at a station with the following further clarification and elucidation :-(i) In respect of Baramulla tehsil, remand shall be granted by District Magistrate only. AC(R) shall grant remand only if District Magistrate is not available. Territorial Tehsildar shall grant remand if and only if both District Magistrate and AC(R) are not available. Nonavailability of any Magistrate shall be deemed if and only if the Magistrate is on leave/outside headquarter as per their movement register.(ii) At Sopore, remand shall be granted by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, T...

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Beant Singh and Sons

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: AIR1998J& K24

M.Y. Kawoosa, J.1. This appeal is directed against the orders dated 20th April, 1996 and 30th July, 1996 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Srinagar in an arbitration petition under Section 20 of Arbitration Act, titled M/s. Beam Singh and Sons versus Union of India and others. Before enumerating the grounds for the appeal, I would like to adumbrate the facts from which the present appeal emanates.2. Respondent, Beant Singh is an 'A' class M.E.S. contractor registered with the appellants and is the sole proprietor of business known as 'Beant Singh and Sons'. According to him, he tendered for and secured the lump sum contract No. CENK-14/78-79 for construction of Admn storage and technical ACCN at Awantipora which was accepted by the appellants on 9th June, 1978. The amount involved in the contract was Rupees fifty six lakhs seventy one thousand and odd. The contract was stipulated to be completed within a period of two years, but, according to the respondent, due to non-avail...

Naseera Nazir and ors. Vs. Executive Engineer

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: (1999)IIILLJ1122J& K

Ab. Quadir Parray, J. 1. This civil reference has been made by the Commissioner under Workman's Compensation Act in the case titled Naseera Nazir and others versus Executive Engineer, in exercise of the power under section 27 of the Workmen's Compensation Act (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act).2. In order to appreciate the reference, the facts in brief are that one Nazir Ahmad Sheikh, who was employed in the Electric Departments as Line man, while performing his duties and repairing electric line near Janglat Mandi, Anantnag on January 25, 1997, received electric shock at the top of the pole and fell down. He received head injuries and died on January 27, 1991. Three applicants (Minors) Naseera Nazir (daughter), Sajad Ahmad and Khalid Nazir (sons) of deceased Nazir Ahmad through their mother Farooqa Nazir and Farooqa Nazir widow of Nazir Ahmad Sheikh filed a claim petition before the Commissioner under Workmen's Compensation Act, Anantnag against the Executive Engineer, Electri...

Ab. Samad Trag Vs. Rahman Lone and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 1998CriLJ1802

ORDERA.Q. Parray, J.1. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners.2. Ld. counsel for the petitioners has filed this revision petition against the order passed by Additional District Magistrate (Assistant Commissioner) on 11-9-1990, whereunder learned Magistrate had dropped the proceedings after having come to the conclusion that there is no apprehension of breach of peace on spot. Though the order prima faciely was ordered (sic) which the Magistrate could pass when he comes to a satisfaction that there is no apprehension of breach of peace and he can pass such an order at any time. It is not required that the time of his dropping of proceedings is to be first notified to the parties. As and when the Magistrate comes to the conclusion or is of the opinion that there is no apprehension of breach of peace regarding any immovable property situated within his jurisdiction, he can drop the proceedings.3. Here in the present case, the learned Magistrate has not assumed the jurisdiction ...

Gulla Mir and ors. Vs. Nazir Ahmad Mir and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 1998CriLJ3544

ORDERMb. Qadir Parray, J.1. Heard Mr. Mehraj at length in these proceedings under Section 561-A, Cr.P.C.2. Mr. Mehraj tried to project that learned Addl. District Magistrate, Kupwara has not passed the order in accordance with the procedure and the statute. He had in fact procured information/ reports from his subordinate agencies right up from the rank of Tehsildar, Girdawar down to the level of Patwari and on the basis of that information, learned Magistrate, respondent No. 6 has assumed jurisdiction under Sub-section (1) of Section 145, Cr.P.C. and issued notices to all the concerned including the non-applicants to put in their respective claims and documents as respect of fact of actual possession of the subject of dispute.3. learned Counsel for the petitioners further submits that the matter was not one of emergency, but even then the learned Additional District Magistrate has attached the property on spot when there are crops standing in the land in dispute and it is only to depr...

Om Parkash Gupta Vs. Suresh Bakshi and anr.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: AIR1998J& K9

G.D. Sharma, J.1. This is a second appeal filed by the appellant against the judgment and decree dated 30-10-1996 passed in 1st Civil Appeal No. 21/93 by the learned 1st Addl. District Judge, Jammu against the judgment and decree dated 13-9-1993 of Munsiff, Sub-Registrar, Jammu. The appeal is not accompanying with a certified copy of the judgment and decree of the Sub-Regislrar, Munsiff. Jammu.2. On January 28, 1997, the learned counsel for respondent No. I raised the objection that in view of the non-compliance of the mandates of Order 42, Rule 1, C.P.C. the appeal is not maintainable. The adjournment were sought by the opposite side to rebut this objection and finally on 25-6-1997 the arguments wore concluded.3. Learned counsel for respondent No. 1 in support of his arguments has cited the provisions of Order 42, Rule 1, C.P.C., which stales that 'the rules of Order 41 shall apply, so far as may be, to appeals from appellate decrees. The appellant shall, in addition to the copies of ...

Baldev Singh and anr. Vs. the State

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

G.D. Sharma, J. 1. This appeal arises out of an internecine fight between two brothers and their family members. Vide judgment dated 2-8-1994 and 5-8-1994 passed by the learned 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Jammu, the appellants were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34, RPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- each. The appellant Onkar Singh has been convicted under Section 323, RPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-. The deceased- Jagdev Singh was the real brother of the appellant-Baldev Singh and uncle of appellant-Onkar Singh. The appellants are the father and the son. The matrix of the prosecution case is that on 17-7-1991, the complainant-Balwan Singh and his father deceased-Jagdev Singh were cultivating their land in village Agwan, Tehsil R. S. Pora, 'When at about 8-30 a.m. the appellant accompanied by Smt. Sunita Devi and Smt. Anita Devi (daughters of appellant-Baldev Sin...

The State Vs. Assad Sofi and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 1998CriLJ797

ORDERA.M. Mir, J.1. This is a Revision filed against an order passed by Sessions Judge Budgam on 29-11-1996, whereunder accused named Ahad Sofi, Assad Sofi and Rahim Sofi have been charged of Section 304, Part-II and thus discharged from Section 302 of RPC. So far accused Mohd. Sofi is concerned he has been discharged. The prosecution story in brief is that on fateful day of occurrence the accused after forming an un-lawful assembly assaulted the deceased Mohd Sofi. He received a fatal blow from accused Assad Sofi. He was hospitalised. After a duration of seven days he succumbed to his head injury sustained by the blow. The learned trial Court after hearing the parties seems to have been noseled by some authorities, reproduced at page 3 of the order and thus held that the death was caused by a 'Single blow' on the spur of moment', without there being any premeditation' and holds the act to be the outcome of sudden impulsive provocation. Interestingly the trial Court has held as under :...