HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) This is a reference made by Sessions Judge, Kupwara vide his order dt. 16-10-1985 for quashing order of Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Handwara dt. 16-4-1984. The order impugned arises out of the following circumstances.
(2.) The petitioner initiated proceedings u/s. 145 Cr. P.C. before the S. D. M. Handwara. The learned Magistrate after passing preliminary order attached the property. Finally the Magistrate could not reach to any conclusion with regard to the factum of possession of the property in dispute. He accordingly referred the matter to Sub-Judge Handwara u/s. 146 Cr. P. C. for determining the factum of possession. The Sub-Judge could not reach to any conclusion with regard to factum of possession and returned a negative finding to that extent.
(3.) The learned S. D. M. on receiving the finding from Sub-Judge proceeded on spot and by making a spot enquiry recorded joint statements of two witnesses and arrived at a conclusion that the respondent was entitled to possession and ordered so accordingly and restored the property in favour of the respondent Aziz Mir.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.