High CourtsSingle Bench

Krishan Lal And Others vs Harnam Dass And Others

Jammu And Kashmir High Court · Decided on 11 September 2023 · Citation: (2023) 09 J&K CK 0014

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjay Dhar, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Others Writ Petition No. 542, 709 Of 2014
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

14 paragraphs · 477 words

Sanjay Dhar, J

OWP No. 709/2014

1.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the complainant-respondent No. 1 has died during the pendency of this writ petition.

2.

A perusal of the minutes of the proceedings reveals that even otherwise nobody has been appearing on behalf of the respondents in this case for quite some time.

3.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record of the case.

4.

The main ground urged by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners in assailing order dated 22.04.2014 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, R. S. Pura is that while issuing process against the petitioners, the learned Magistrate has not spelt out as to what offences have been made out against the petitioners. It is contended that the dispute between the petitioners and the complainant is purely of civil nature and no criminal offence is made out against the petitioners.

5.

A perusal of impugned order dated 22.04.2014 passed by the learned Magistrate reveals that it does not indicate as to what offences have been made out against the petitioners. The learned Magistrate has simply observed that from the statement of the complainant and complaint, prima facie cognizable offences are disclosed and accordingly, process has been issued against the petitioners.

6.

Issuance of process in a criminal complaint is a serious business and the same cannot be approached by a Magistrate in a mechanical manner. It was incumbent upon the learned Magistrate to clearly indicate in his order as to what offences were prima facie are made out against the petitioners on the basis of the material available before him. Without undertaking such an exercise, the learned Magistrate has proceeded to pass the impugned order whereby the petitioners have been summoned to face criminal prosecution. Such an order cannot be sustained in law and as such, the same deserves to be quashed.

7.

Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed and the order dated 22.04.2014 is quashed. It shall, however, be open to the learned Magistrate to pass a fresh order on the basis of material available before him/her. While doing so, the trial Magistrate shall also consider whether the allegations made in the complaint disclose any criminal offence or the same disclose only a dispute of civil nature only. The learned Magistrate shall also be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, keeping in view the factum of death of the complainant. The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

8.

A copy of this order be sent to the learned JMIC, R. S. Pura.

OWP No. 542/2014

9.

Learned counsel for the respondents seeks further time to provide copy of the status report to the learned counsel for the petitioners.

10.

Needful be done positively by the next date of hearing.

11.

List on 06.11.2023.