HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
MUKHTAR AHMAD AND ANR – Appellant
Versus
MUBASSIR LATIFI ,S.P.RAJOURI AND ORS – Respondent
CPCR 2/2014
S. No. 231
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
AT JAMMU
CPCR No. 2/2014 in
[CRMC No. 210/2013]
Mukhtar Ahmad and another
...Petitioner(s)
Through :- Mr. Ajaz Chowdhary, Advocate
v/s
<
Mubassir Latifi, S. P. Rajouri and others
.....Respondent (s)
't
Through :- None
Coram:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE
ORDER
1.
This is a petition seeking initiating of contempt proceedings against
the respondents for willful disobedience and non-compliance of the order dated
03.02.2014, whereby a direction was given to the respondents not to finalize the
investigation.
2.
It is alleged by the petitioners that despite the concerned
Investigating Officer being aware of the fact that there is a stay from this Court,
he issued notice to the petitioners to remain present in the court of learned
Sessions Judge, Rajouri for presentation of the challan.
3.
Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 have filed the statement of facts and stand taken is
that the investigation in the matter had been completed in the year 2013 itself.
However, the challan prepared by the Police Station, Rajouri vide Final Report
No. 120/2013 dated 09.05.2013 could not be produced in the Court of law as the
accused had evaded their presence. It is further submitted that on 19.04.2014,
2 CPCR No. 2/2014
respondent Nos. 3 & 4 wrote a docket to the accused persons to appear in the
Court of Sessions Judge, Rajouri on 23.04.2014 for production of challan. They
were also informed telephonically in this regard. However, on 23.04.2014, notice
was received through DAK from Advocate Ajaz Chowdhary of the High Court
of J&K, not to produce the challan in the court below as investigation was stayed
by the Hon’ble High Court. On the directions of the High Court, the challan in
the case has not been produced in any Court of law and is pending with the
Police.
4.
In view of the aforesaid stand of the respondents, I am of the view
that no case for initiating the proceedings against the respondents is made out,
and the contempt petition is dismissed, accordingly.
(SANJEEV KUMAR)
JUDGE
JAMMU
17.02.2021
Shivalee
Whether the order is speaking:
Yes/No
Whether the order is reportable:
Yes/No