2 Important Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cases Decided Today [Wednesday, October 17, 2018]

1. Naresh Kumar v. State

Bail Application - Gang Rape - Victim has committed suicide by jumping into the river Chenab as is evident from the investigation conducted by the police till date - Although dead body of the victim has not yet been recovered, but it can be inferred at this stage that due to gang rape, victim committed suicide. Further investigation in this regard is going on. The punishment for offence u/s 376-D RPC is rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than twenty five years, which may extend to life which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that persons natural life and with fine. 

Law is now well settled that while considering the bail petitions especially during investigation, (a) The nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, (b) Reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant and (c) Prima facie satisfaction of the court in support of the charge, are some of relevant consideration.

Judgment : View / Download

Case Number : CRMC No.514/2018 c/w BA No.122/2018 & BA No.119/2018

Bench : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar Gupta, Judge

Appearing counsel: For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. A. K. Sawhney, Advocate. For the Respondent(s): Mr. Raman Sharma, Dy AG

2. Daljeet Singh v. State of J&K

Service Law - Writ Petition - Delay - When a person who is not vigilant of his rights and acquiesces to the situation, their writ petition cannot be entertained after a long delay even on the ground that the same relief was granted to a person similarly circumstanced who was vigilant enough about his rights and had challenged the action without any unnecessary wastage of time.

The writ petition filed by the petitioners is hit by delay and laches as well as acquiescence. As already stated, and is reiterated once again, the judgment passed in Sanjeev Khajuria's case was not a judgment in rem rendered by this Court with an intention to give benefit to all similarly situated persons nor the relief granted to Sanjeev Khajuria could be said to be declaratory, intended to apply to all similarly circumstanced persons, irrespective of whether they were parties to the litigation or not. There is inordinate delay of 11 years in approaching the Court, which has not been explained by the petitioners by placing any material on record. The only plea taken by the petitioners that they being similarly situated with Sanjiv Khajuria and Paramjeet Singh cannot be deprived of the benefit which has been granted to them, may be, due to the intervention of this Court, cannot be accepted for the reasons given herein above. The contention of the respondents that the petitioners were a fence sitter and therefore, are not entitled to any relief whatsoever, deserves to be accepted.

Judgment : View / Download

Case Number : SWP No.1238/2016 MP No.1/2016

Bench : Hon'ble Mr Justice Sanjeev Kumar, Judge.

Appearance: For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Abhinav Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent(s) : Mrs. Seems Shekhar, Sr. AG. Mr. Raman Sharma, Dy. AG.