HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT SRINAGAR

LPA no.80/2020, CrlM no. 343/2020

&

LPA no.84/2021 with CM no.4348/2021

Reserved on: 03.08.2021

Pronounced on: 16.08.2021

Shamshada Akhter

… Appellant

Through: Mr. Hakim Suhail Ishtiaq, Advocate.

v.

Aijaz Parvaiz Shah

…Respondent

Through: Mr. Shafqat Nazir, Advocate.

AND

Parvez Ahmad Fafoo

…Appellant

Through: Mr. Hakim Suhail Ishtiaq, Advocate.

v.

Imtiyaz Ahmad Tak

…Respondent

Through: Mr. Shafqat Nazir, Advocate.

Coram:

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge.

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar, Judge.

(JUDGMENT)

Per Magrey, J:

1.

These two Letters Patent Appeals (LPAs) have been filed by the

appellants against the orders passed by two different learned Single Judges

of this Court in petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973 (now applicable in the Union Territory of Jammu and

Kashmir) / 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1933 (now repealed).

The two provisions are in pari materia to each other.

2.

The question arising for determination in both these LPAs is about

their maintainability under Clause 12 of the J&K Letters Patent of 1943.

Therefore, the two LPAs were taken up and heard together on the said

Page 2 of 14

LPA No. 80/2020, CrlM No. 343/2020 &

LPA No. 84/2021 with CM No. 4348/2021

question of law, and are being dealt with by this common order. First, the

brief narration of factual matrix of the two cases is given hereunder.

LPA no.80/2020:

3.

The appellant on 26.02.2019 filed a complaint under the J&K

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2010 (the Act), alleging

therein that her husband, respondent herein, had subjected her to domestic

violence. She sought compensation, damages and prohibition against

committing acts of domestic violence and harassment, as well as

maintenance to the tune of Rs.40,000/- per month. The appellant is working

as a Bank Manager and the respondent has retired from Government service.

Obviously, they are quite aged. They are issueless.

4.

The trial Magistrate, namely, the Special Mobile Magistrate,

Passenger Tax & Electricity (PT&E), Srinagar, by order dated 29.04.2019,

without going into the merits of the matter, on finding that the parties were

quite aged, inasmuch as the husband had even retired, directed the parties to

accommodate each other in a cordial and friendly manner in the house where

they were residing before the dispute. The Magistrate further ordered the

appellant to provide a two room accommodation to the respondent-husband,

who had to undertake to live peacefully in the house without causing any

cruelty 3 physical or mental 3 to the appellant.

5.

The appellant filed a statutory appeal under Section 29 of the Act on

06.05.2019. The Appellate Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Srinagar,

found the appeal lacking merit and, therefore, disposed of the same by order

dated 24.02.2020.

6.

The appellant, thereafter, filed a petition under Section 482 Cr. P. C.,

being CRM(M) no.58/2020, on 28.02.2020, seeking quashing of orders

dated 29.04.2019 and 24.02.2020, respectively, passed by the trial

Magistrate and the Appellate Court. That petition was dismissed by order

dated 03.03.2020 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court, finding it

to be without any merit. The instant LPA has been filed under Clause 12 of

the Letters Patent challenging the aforesaid order dated 03.03.2020 passed

Page 3 of 14

LPA No. 80/2020, CrlM No. 343/2020 &

LPA No. 84/2021 with CM No. 4348/2021

by the learned Single Judge in the aforesaid petition under Section 482 Cr. P.

C.

LPA no.84/2020:

7.

In this case, the respondent in the LPA filed a complaint on

09.05.2017 against the appellant under Section 138 of Negotiable

Instruments Act before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class (Sub-

Judge), B