Union Territory Through Police Station vs Ghulamrasool Mir And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 1648 j&K/2

Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench

Union Territory Through Police Station vs Ghulamrasool Mir And Another on 29 October, 2024

Author: Rahul Bharti

Bench: Rahul Bharti

                                                         Serial No.07
                                                 Special Supplementary Cause
                                                             List

     HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                    AT SRINAGAR

                        CrlA (AS) No. 14/2021


Union Territory through Police Station                        ...Petitioner(s)
Crime Branch
Through: Ms. MahaMajeed, Assiting Counsel vice
         Mr. MohsinQadiri, Sr. AAG.
                                  Vs.

GhulamRasool Mir and Another.                               ...Respondent(s)

Through: Mr. Zahoor A. Shah, Advocate.

CORAM:
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE.
                               ORDER

29.10.2024

1. Special Mobile Magistrate (13th Finance) Srinagar in a criminal case "State Vs. Farhana and Another" came to pass a judgment of conviction dated 19.12.2014. The criminal trial against two accused persons, being daughter and father, had commenced on FIR No. 69/1995 registered for alleged commission of offences under section 120-B/420/467 and 471 of Ranbir Penal Code. The conviction of said two accused persons had come to take place by reference to commission of offences under section 120-B and 471/420 RPC but acquitting them of charge under Section 468 RPC.

2. Aggrieved of the said conviction, the two accused persons had taken out an appeal under Section 409 of the J&K Code of Criminal Procedure Samvat 1989 before the Principal Sessions Judge, Srinagar on File No. 14/Appeal of 2014 titled "Ghulam Rasool Mir and Another Vs. State of J&K" through P/S Crime, Srinagar.

3. This conviction appeal came to be allowed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Srinagar by passing a judgment of acquittal dated 18.12.2020 holding that the prosecution was at failure to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and therefore, acquitted the two accused persons.

4. Thus, the appellate judgment came to be the judgment of acquittal which was amenable to an appeal under Section 417 of the J&K Code of Criminal Procedure Samvat 1989.

5. The appeal being preferred was time barred as such accompanied with an application being CM No. 892/2021 seeking condonation of delay of 146 days and also accompanied with an application CM No. 893/2021 for leave to institute the appeal as required in terms of Section 417.

6. Though the condonation of delay came to be granted in terms of an order dated 17.08.2021 but the leave to maintain the present appeal has not earned any indulgence of this court notwithstanding the fact that the order dated 13.08.2021 was as exparte against the two respondents with respect to admission of the appeal. There is an error in the proceedings of this case in the manner that while the condonation of delay came to be allowed in terms of order dated 13.08.2021, later on inadvertently in terms of an order dated 29.11.2021 condonation of delay application was again put to objections of the respondents.

7. There is no order granting leave to maintain the appeal in favour of the appellant and that is an essential requirement of law which is not dispensable, as such, the appeal to be deemed not to have been entertained without first considering the application CM No. 893/2021 through the medium of which leave to appeal is being sought by the appellant.

8. List the application bearing CM No.893/2021 for consideration along with main case on 21.11.2024.

(RAHUL BHARTI) JUDGE SRINAGAR:

29.10.2024 "Shaista"