CRUCIFIXION OF AN INNOCENT KASHMIRI AGED MUSLIM BY A JUDGE OF THE J&K HIGH COURT FOR TAKING RECOURSE TO LAW & JUSTICE Prof. Abdul Gani Bhat, Pomposh Lane, Natipora, Srinagar. cell: 9906631367 On 17th instant the press was agog with news of the Writer having been penalized by the High Court of J&K and the news appeared with different captions in different papers thus: HC imposes Rs.1 lakh costs on Prof. Bhat. Directs for contempt proceedings against him (Kashmir Times) HC orders proceedings against person for ‘maligning the Ld. Judges’ (Kashmir Images) Retired professor to pay Rs 1 lakh for repeatedly seeking trial of Ld. Judges (Kashmir Tribune) HC penalizes Writer for using ‘derogatory language’ against Ld. Judges. (Greater Kashmir) HC imposes Rs. 1 lakh costs on Writer for ‘interference with justice’ (Kashmir Reader) The Order of the Ld. Judge of the High court, Mr. Virender Singh is out and out unlawful, illegal, unconstitutional and without jurisdiction and hence should be non-est in the eye of law. His case of bias and prejudice was reported by the writer to the Hon’ble Supreme court by means of Writ Petition (C ) No. 56/2013, and the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 3.5.2013 had permitted the Writer to move representation before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of the High court for transferring his cases from the bench of Mr. Virender Singh to other bench/benches. The representation was made to the Hon’ble Chief Justice on 7th May 2013, attaching a copy of the Supreme Court order, from which time the said Ld. Judge has had automatically lost jurisdiction to hear the Writer’s cases. Hon’ble Chief Justice of the High Court is the master of the roster and under law a Ld. Judge can hear only those cases as are assigned to him by the Hon’ble Chief Justice. On 5th June 2013 case I.A. 191/2013 only was listed under “ORDERS” column for recalling order of court dated 18.9.2013 before the said Ld. Judge Mr. Virender Singh, (though wrongly, as he had lost jurisdiction to hear the writer’s cases in light of the said Supreme Court order). Still the brief assigned to him on this date was only and only to hear and decide the I.A.191/2013 and nothing beyond that. The petition 561-A No.174/2012 which the Ld. Judge Mr. Virender Singh, vide his order dated 15.7.2013, has dismissed with costs of Rs. 1 lakh was not listed at all before him on the said date of 5th June, so there was no question of his hearing and deciding the same on the said date. The Ld. Judge Mr. Virender Singh could not open the petition also because the same stood locked-up by another coordinate Ld. Judge, Mr. J.P.Singh, vide his order dated 18.9.2012, when he had ordered that the petition could not be opened and considered unless the Writer would deposit Rs.25000/- in the Registry to prove his ‘bona fides’ in filing the petition. Further by his own order dated 24.5.2013, when Criminal Contempt of court matter in the 561-A No.174/2013 was wrongly listed before the said Ld. Judge Mr.Virender Singh, (firstly because he had no jurisdiction to hear Writer’s cases , secondly because criminal contempt of court matters fall within the domain of DB) he had directed for listing the said petition on 28.6.2013. He could not sit on his own order dated 24.5.2013 and open the petition in his chamber that also behind the back of the Writer and pass order thereon, during the intervening period from his “order reserved” on 6.6.2013 to his announcing the order on 15.7.2013. The opening of the petition by Ld. Judge Mr. Virender Singh, and reading or not reading the same during the period of his ‘ordered reserved’ on 6.6.2013 in I.A.191/2013 to his announcing the order on 15.7.2013, is judicial indiscipline and judicial impropriety to say the least. The Ld. Judge Mr.Virender Singh has then directed the Registrar Judicial to register ‘Criminal Contempt of Court’ against the Writer on a missive of the Chief Judicial Magistrate sent by him to the ‘worthy Registrar Judicial’ on 12th April 2012. The Ld. Judge had no power /authority/ Jurisdiction to order so. Firstly because the Criminal Contempt of Court case was not listed before him on the date of 5th June 2013; secondly Criminal Contempt of Court matters fall strictly within the domain of the Division Bench and not within the domain of a single Bench. One more interesting thing is that Criminal Contempt of Court on the said missive of the CJM’s was already registered (as No. 3 of 2012) and was making rounds between the Division Benches in the Court, to which the Writer has had also filed his reply as back as on 25.6.2012, and the said Ld. Judge Mr. Virender Singh has had himself also sat with other Ld. Judges to ‘hear’ that Robkar (criminal Contempt 3/2012) three times on 8.6.2012; 21.5.2013 (without jurisdiction) and on 26.7.2013 ( when both the Ld. Judges, M/S virender singh and M.H.Attar, were without jurisdiction) on which date they are said to have issued bailable warrants as well against the Writer. So how come another criminal contempt of court could be registered on the same matter twice? The Ld. Judge Mr. Virender Singh has then directed the Registrar Judicial to register yet another Criminal Contempt of court against the writer for his allegedly saying that “he had no faith in the court” which though not constituting Criminal Contempt of court at all by any means or measure whatsoever, still the Writer had denied saying so vide his written reply on the very next day of 19.9.2012 and through the I.A. 191/2013 on affidavit. Further consideration and registration of Criminal Contempt of Court cases fall within the jurisdiction of a Division Bench. How the Single Ld. Judge in Mr. Virender Singh has assumed power/ /authority/ jurisdiction to deal with the matter and direct the Registrar Judicial to register a Criminal Contempt of Court against the Writer is an enigma. This is beyond the logic, reasoning and comprehension of the writer and everyone else. The Ld. Judge has further ordered for a Xerox copy of the Judgement in PIL 545/2008 which is currently seized of by the Division Bench presided over by the Hon’ble Chief Justice through I.A.No.2156/2011. The Ld. Judge in his changed and moulded order dictated by him in open court on 6th June (which he has changed and moulded in his chamber during the intervening period when order was reserved on 6th June to its announcement on 7th July) has said that he wanted the Xerox copy for reference purposes, when it had nothing to do with the I.A.191/13 in question and such an adventurism is frowned upon by the Hon’ble Supreme court (State of Rajasthan v.Prakash Chand – 1997). In the garb of reference, he has virtually reproduced the whole Judgement of his friend Judges M/s N.A.Kakru and M.H.Attar in his order of 15.7.2013 and has then passed his observations/findings that the Writer had filed the PIL to benefit his own son when he could not get the same relief in his SWP 744/2008. To dispel the misgiving created by the observations/ findings in the general public, the Writer submits that he had filed the writ petition 744/08 in the court on 16.4.2008 against an altogether different matter and against altogether different respondents, whereas the SKIMS had advertised its posts on 10.5.2008 with the last dated for receipt of application as 28.6.2008. Where could he challenge the selection of the later advertisement beforehand on 16.4.2008? The writer had filed the PIL on 23.6.2008 with the sole prayer to direct the respondent SKIMS to amend its advertisement Notification dated 10.5.2008 so as to bring it in tune with MCI regulations lest the College may get derecognized as has had been the case with several other colleges who had not followed the MCI Regulations. How could the writer challenge the selection of the SKIMS posts in writ petition 744/08 filed on 16.4.2008 when the applications in the SKIMS Advertisement had not even been received fully? Can even a common man in the street take it on its face value and digest it. This all has been done to take revenge from the writer for filing defamation complaint and other complaints against ex-judge, Mr. Nissar Ahmed Kakru who happens to be the close and bosom friend of the Ld. Judge Mr. Virender Singh. Whether the Ld. Judge (i). by opening the not listed on 5.6.2013 and sealed petition 561-A 174/2012 in his chamber during the intervening period from his “order reserved” in I.A.191/2013 on 6.6.2013 to his coming out with the order on 15.7.2013; (ii). getting a Xerox copy of the Judgement from the file which was currently lying under active consideration of the Hon’ble Division Bench, and then reproducing the same in his order dated 15.7.13 and then passing his observations/findings thereon; (iii). by ordering registration of criminal contempt of court in a case which was already registered (as 3/2012) and was being heard by Division Benches including the Ld. Judge Mr. virender Singh himself several times, and (iv) by further ordering registration of another Criminal Contempt of Court against the writer, the Ld. Judge Mr. Virender Singh has committed criminal tress pass, judicial impropriety, judicial indiscipline and criminal contempt of the Division Bench is left to the wisdom of the readers, knowledgeable persons and men of worth, courage and character in the society The Writer has filed recall petition of this unlawful, illegal and unconstitutional order before the Hon’ble Court on 31st of July 2013 with scant hopes of getting speedy justice. 5.8.2013. Prof. Abdul Gani Bhat. Cell 9906631367
Posted on: Mon, 05 Aug 2013 15:42:47 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015