Irfan Ahmad Lone vs Ut Of J&K & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 1245 j&K/2

                                                                        S. No. 140
                                                                        Suppl. List



        HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                       AT SRINAGAR

                         CM(5881/2023) IN WP(Crl) 211/ CrlM(918/2022)

IRFAN AHMAD LONE

                                                             ...Petitioner(s)
              Through: None.
                                    V/s

UT OF J&K & ORS.
                                                            ...Respondent(s)

              Through:
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE

                                       ORDER

04.10.2023

CM(5881/2023) This application has been filed for preponing the next date fixed in the main petition.

On perusal of the file, I do not find any good ground for preponing the next date already fixed in the main petition. List the main petition on the due date.

Application is dismissed accordingly.

(WASIM SADIQ NARGAL) JUDGE Srinagar 04.10.2023 Muzammil. Q

Suppl. List

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR

HCP 109/2023

ARIF AIJAZ SHAHRI ...Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Mian Tufail, Advocate.

V/s

UT OF J&K & ORS.

...Respondent(s)

Through:

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE

ORDER 04.10.2023

Heard. Admit. Issue notice returnable within four weeks. Steps for service within one week. Counter affidavit within notice period.

List thereafter on 04.11.2023.

(WASIM SADIQ NARGAL) JUDGE Srinagar 04.10.2023 Muzammil. Q

Suppl. List

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR

CRM(M) 513/2023 CrlM(1214/2023)

SHEIKH MOHAMMAD YAQOOB ...Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Mohammad Yawar Hussain, Advocate.

V/s

UT OF J&K & ORS.

...Respondent(s)

Through:

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE

ORDER 04.10.2023

After arguing for a while, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for withdrawal of the instant writ petition to seek appropriate remedy under law. Prayer allowed.

Dismissed as withdrawn along-with connected application with liberty as prayed for.

(WASIM SADIQ NARGAL) JUDGE Srinagar 04.10.2023 Muzammil. Q

Suppl. List

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR

WP(C) 2553/2023 CM(6054/2023)

GHULAM MOHAMMAD GANIA AND ORS.

...Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. M. Ashraf Wani, Advocate.

V/s

REGISTRAR COOPERATIVE SOCIETY AND ORS.

...Respondent(s)

Through:

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE

ORDER 04.10.2023

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners at length and perused the record.

Issue notice.

Dasti service is also permitted. Subject to petitioners taking steps for service upon respondents, Registry to issue notice to the respondents within three weeks.

List on 04.11.2023.

(WASIM SADIQ NARGAL) JUDGE Srinagar 04.10.2023 Muzammil. Q

Suppl. List

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR

CM(6037/2023) IN OWP 1759/2018

ABRAR AHMAD TANTRAY ...Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Ateeb Kanth, Advocate.

V/s

STATE OF J&K & ORS.

...Respondent(s)

Through:

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE

ORDER 04.10.2023

CM(6037/2023 This application has been filed for preponing the next date fixed in the main petition.

On perusal of the file, I do not find any good ground for preponing the next date already fixed in the main petition. List the main petition on the due date.

Application is dismissed accordingly.

(WASIM SADIQ NARGAL) JUDGE Srinagar 04.10.2023 Muzammil. Q

Suppl. List

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR

CM(6084/2023) IN WP(C) 3036/2022 CM(7629/2022)

RUBEENA AND ORS.

...Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Zubair Ahmad, Advocate.

V/s

UT OF J&K & ORS.

...Respondent(s)

Through:

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE

ORDER 04.10.2023

CM(6084/2023) It has been brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioners have filed the instant application seeking restoration of the main petition but the said application has not been scanned. Registry to scan the said application and be listed on 18.10.2023

(WASIM SADIQ NARGAL) JUDGE Srinagar 04.10.2023 Muzammil. Q

Suppl. List

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR

CCP(S) 416/2023 in[WP(C) 1253/2022]

M/S SKY TECH ENGINEERS ...Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Showkat Ali Khan, Advocate.

V/s

MATEEN KOUL AND ORS.

...Respondent(s)

Through: Ms. Rekha Wangnoo, GA. Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE

ORDER 04.10.2023

1. The instant Contempt Petition has been preferred against the order/judgment dated 20.12.2022 passed in WP(C) No. 1253/2022, wherein the writ petition filed by the petitioner was disposed of with the direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner as put forth by him in the writ petition regarding rectification of error crept in calculating the allotted amount as well as payment of unpaid amount after hearing the petitioner and to pass reasoned order within the period of two months from the date certified copy of the order was to be served to the respondents.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has filed the instant petition as the aforesaid order/judgment has not been implemented within the stipulated period as directed by this Court.

3. Issue notice. On asking of this Court, Ms. Wangnoo, GA caused appearance and waives notice on behalf of the respondents.

4. The present Contempt Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to comply with the order/judgment dated 20.12.2022 passed in WP(C) No. 1253/2022 within a period of two weeks from the date copy of this order along-with the writ petition

and its annexures are supplied to the respondents by according consideration to the claim of the petitioner as put forth by him in the writ petition bearing WP(C) No. 1253/2022 regarding rectification of the error crept in calculating the allotted amount as well as payment of unpaid amount after giving due opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. It is made clear that in case if the order is not complied within the aforesaid period, the petitioner will be at liberty to revive the present Contempt Petition, and in that eventuality this Court will be constrained to take coercive measures against the respondents.

5. Disposed of accordingly.

(WASIM SADIQ NARGAL) JUDGE Srinagar 04.10.2023 Muzammil. Q

Suppl. List

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR

CCP(S) 417/2023 in[WP(C) 1780/2021]

M/S SKY TECH ENGINEERS ...Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Showkat Ali Khan, Advocate.

V/s

SHALIN KABRA AND ORS.

...Respondent(s)

Through: Ms. Rekha Wangnoo, GA. Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE

ORDER 04.10.2023

1. The instant Contempt Petition has been preferred against the order/judgment dated 13.04.2022 passed in WP(C) No. 1780/2021, wherein the writ petition filed by the petitioner was disposed of with the direction to the respondents to make payment of the ETS work at Tral to the petitioner at the same rate-structure as was made applicable to the ETS Awantipora conducted by the petitioner, within the period of two months.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid order/judgment has not been implemented within the stipulated period as directed by this Court.

3. Issue notice. On asking of this Court, Ms. Wangnoo, GA caused appearance and waives notice on behalf of the respondents.

4. The present Contempt Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to comply with the order/judgment dated 13.04.2022 passed in WP(C) No. 1780/2021 within a period of two weeks from the date copy of this order along-with the writ petition and its annexures are supplied to the respondents by according consideration to the claim of the petitioner as put forth by him in the writ petition bearing WP(C) No. 1780/2021

regarding payment of the ETS work at Tral to the petitioner at the same rate-structure as was made applicable to the ETS Awantipora conducted by the petitioner, after giving due opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. It is, however, made clear that in case if the order is not complied within the aforesaid period, the petitioner will be at liberty to revive the present Contempt Petition, and in that eventuality this Court will be constrained to take coercive measures against the respondents.

5. Disposed of accordingly.

(WASIM SADIQ NARGAL) JUDGE Srinagar 04.10.2023 Muzammil. Q

Suppl. List

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR

CRM(M) 514/2023 CrlM(1215/2023)

MOHAMMAD YOUSUF MAKROO ...Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Tahir Ahmad Bhat, Advocate.

V/s

MOHAMMAD ASHRAF MALIK ...Respondent(s)

Through:

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE

ORDER 04.10.2023

1. The petitioner has sought quashing of the complaint bearing No. 15 of 2023 titled "Mohammad Ashraf Malik Vs. Mohammad Yousuf Makroo" pending before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shopian (for short 'trial court') and also the order dated 01.04.2023 by virtue of which the process has been issued against the petitioner for commission of offence under section 138 N.I.Act, on the ground that the respondent/complainant has not issued any statutory notice as per the N.I.Act to the Firm or its partner, and the Firm has not been made party in the complaint. It is also argued that the order dated 01.04.2023 has been passed on the printed format by filing the blank spaces.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length and perused the record.

3. This Court finds substance in the contention raised by the petitioner that the learned trial Magistrate has issued the process by filling the blanks of the printed proforma for issuing the process against petitioner.

4. In this regard I am fortified with the judgment rendered in case Pepsi Foods Ltd. v. Special Judicial Magistrate reported as (1998) 5 SCC 749, 760, wherein it has been held as under:

"28. Summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter. Criminal law cannot be set into motion as a matter of course. It is not that the complainant has to bring only two witnesses to support his allegations in the complaint to have the criminal law set into motion. The order of the Magistrate summoning the accused must reflect that he has applied his mind to the facts of the case and the law applicable thereto. He has to examine the nature of allegations made in the complaint and the evidence both oral and documentary in support thereof and would that be sufficient for the complainant to succeed in bringing charge home to the accused. It is not that the Magistrate is a silent spectator at the time of recording of preliminary evidence before summoning of the accused. The Magistrate has to carefully scrutinise the evidence brought on record and may even himself put questions to the complainant and his witnesses to elicit answers to find out the truthfulness of the allegations or otherwise and then examine if any offence is prima fade committed by all or any of the accused."

5. The issuance of process is a serious matter and it must reflect the application of mind on the part of the concerned Magistrate though it is not incumbent upon the Magistrate to explicitly state the reasons for issuance of process. The practice of issuance of process on printed proforma by filling blank spaces by hand has been deprecated by the various High Courts. Taking cognizance and the issuance of process is a judicial act. It must reflect application of mind. The process should not be issued in a mechanical manner by simply filling the blank spaces in the printed proforma. Such practice provides an occasion to the accused to approach the higher courts complaining the non-application of mind by the Magistrate, thereby leading to an avoidable delay in the disposal of the complaint. On this ground only, this Court is of the view that the

order of issuance of process dated 01.04.2023 is not sustainable in the eyes of law and the same is quashed.

6. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of by permitting the respondent to file duly sworn fresh affidavit, before the learned trial court and the learned trial court after considering the statement of respondent/complainant and witness of the complainant, shall proceed in accordance with law by passing fresh orders. This Court, however, has not made any observation on the merits of the claim of either of the parties.

7. Disposed of accordingly.

(WASIM SADIQ NARGAL) JUDGE Srinagar 04.10.2023 Muzammil. Q

Suppl. List

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR

WP(C) 2548/2023 CM(6046/2023)

ESS BEE MEDICAL CENTER ...Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Sheikh Manzoor, Advocate.

V/s

UT OF J&K & ORS.

...Respondent(s)

Through: Ms. Rekha Wangnoo, GA. Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE

ORDER 04.10.2023

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length and perused the record.

Issue notice. Ms. Rekha Wangnoo, learned GA waived notice on behalf of the respondents.

With a view to appreciate the controversy involved in the instant petition, it would be apt to direct the respondents to file status report within one week positively with respect to the decision taken in pursuance to the enquiry conducted with regard to the allegations levelled against the petitioner proprietor of ESS BEE Medical Centre, Kupwara, which led to the death of the patient namely Mudasir Ahmad Sofi.

List on 21.10.2023. Meanwhile, passing of interim direction is deferred for the time-being and the application for interim relief will be considered on the next date of hearing only after status report is filed by the respondents and examined by the Court.

(WASIM SADIQ NARGAL) JUDGE Srinagar 04.10.2023 Muzammil. Q