1. "Cicero" the famous Roman statesman has said, "chief law is public good." In democratic society courts function for the benefit of society, so Judges are accountable to the society. Judges are not per se public servants. They carry out the will of the Legislature subject to constitutional limitations and laws. The role of the Judge is not only to resolve the disputes but the Judges are further charged with the sacred duty of administering justice. Justice has to be administered according to laws. May be in rare and most exceptional cases justice may be tempered with mercy. Judge in the discharge of his sacred duty has to follow the procedure established by law.

"Deuteronumic" code of old testament summarized the personality of Judge as under;

"And charged your Judges at the time, saying, hear the causes between your brethren, and Judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger that is with him. Ye, shall not respect person in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of the man,"(Denternomy, Chapter 1 versus 16-17). The judges who are bestowed with the sacred and onerous duty of administering justice, have not to decide the lis before them according to their own predilections and peculiar dispositions. Justice has to be administered in accordance with laws and settled judicial principles.

"Delvin" in the "Judge" has said; "Judge who gives the right judgment while appearing not to do so may be thrice blessed in Heaven, but on earth he is no use at all."

2. The necessity has arisen for stating all this in the case in hand. It appears from the record of the trial court that the trial court has dealt with the matter in routine manner. The record reveals that the present petitioner, hereinafter referred to as plaintiff, instituted Civil Original Suit against the respondents hereinabove referred to as defendants in the court of Sub-Judge Handwara, the plaintiff sought following decrees from the court:

"i) By a decree for permanent injunction be passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants restraining the defendants from shifting the timber from the premises of the unit of the plaintiff till the investigation by the vigilance department is completed.

ii) Any other decree, relief, order or command which this Honble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case be also passed in favour of plaintiff and against the defendants. Same will meet the ends of justice."

3. The plaintiff in the plaint has stated that he has Unit at Kachwari Handwara and the said Unit is being run by him as an attorney for last more than five years. He has further pleaded that he is conducting his affairs merely in accordance with the guidelines and rules prescribed by J&K Forest Act. The plaintiff has further averred in the plaint that he has been running the Unit to the satisfaction of the defendants from the date of its installation and no complaint whatsoever has been filed with the defendants against functioning of the plaintiffs Unit. The plaintiff has further submitted that the defendants either themselves or through their authorized officials are at intervals checking the records, stock in hand, in the Unit of the plaintiff. The plaintiff has further averred that on 26th May 2007, some officials of Vigilance Organization inspected the Unit of the plaintiff and seized some timber which was stocked in the premises of the plaintiffs unit. He has further submitted that the timber so seized is legal. The plaintiff has further averred in the plaint that measurement of the seized timber could not be conducted by the Vigilance Organization as no expert was accompanying them. The seized timber, however, was hammered by the officials of the Forest Department and the timber was kept in the premises of the unit of the plaintiff. At para 8 of the plaint, the plaintiff has submitted that the defendants are now causing undue interference with the smooth running of the u

Click Here to Read the rest of this document