Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Imtiyaz Ahmad Bhat vs Ut Through P/S Damhal Hanjipora on 6 May, 2021
S. No. 108
Supp-I Cause List
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
AT SRINAGAR.
(Through virtual mode)
CrlM No. 476/2021
CRM (M) No. 153/2021
CrlM No. 477/2021
Imtiyaz Ahmad Bhat
...Petitioner/Appellant(s)
Through: Mr. Mir Manzoor Ahmad, Advocate
Vs
UT through P/S Damhal Hanjipora
...Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Asifa Padroo, AAG
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Javed Iqbal Wani, Judge
ORDER
01. The inherent jurisdiction of this court under Section 482 Cr. P. C
is being invoked by the petitioner through the medium of the instant
petition for directing the court of Judicial Magistrate, D. H. Pora, (for
short the trial court) for fixing the calendar for the trial of the case titled
as "State Through SHO P/S D. H. Pora versus Mohammad Shameem
Parray & Ors." arising out of FIR No. 108/2016 and for speedy trial of
the same preferably within two months.
02. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, in FIR No.
108/2016 registered in Police Station D. H. Pora under Section 147, 148,
341 and 336, the petitioner came to be implicated, arrested and
subsequently released on bail.
03. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, after
completion of investigation, charge sheet came to be produced before
the trial court on 02.12.2017.
04. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, out of five
listed witnesses in the case, statement of two witnesses has been
recorded so far and the trial of the case has not been concluded which is
causing grave prejudice to the rights and interests of the petitioner, in
that, the petitioner has been working as a teacher in the Education
Department and his salary on account of pendency of the criminal case
has been stopped.
05. According to the learned counsel, the delay in completing and
concluding the trial runs in conflict with Section 309 Cr. P. C inasmuch
as violates Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The learned counsel
in this regard referred to the Judgment of the Apex Court titled as "A. R.
Antulay vs. R. S. Nayak reported in 1992 Vol. 1 SCC 225."
06. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for disposal of the
petition at this stage while seeking the relief prayed in the petition.
07. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the
record.
08. Having regard to the contents of the petition coupled with the
record annexed thereto inasmuch as the submissions made by the
learned counsel for the petitioner, prima facie there appears to be
substance in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
petitioner necessitating disposal of the petition at this stage without
issuing a notice or else formally admitting the same. Therefore, in view
of the innocuous nature of relief sought in the petition and the law laid
down in A. R. Antulay case supra, the instant petition is disposed of in
the following terms;
The trial court "subject to all just exceptions, shall make every effort
and endeavor to complete and conclude the trial of the case titled as
State through P/S D. H. Pora vs. Mohammad Shameem Parray & Ors.
as expeditiously as possible without any delay."
09. It is made clear that this court did not express any opinion about
the guilt or otherwise of the petitioner herein being accused in the
aforesaid criminal case.
10. Disposed of along with all connected applications.
(Javed Iqbal Wani)
Judge
Srinagar.
06.05.2021
"Sakeena"
SAKEENA MOLVI
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
18.05.2021 02:36
