Jammu October-05-2023- A Division Bench of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court Comprising Chief Justice N Kotishwar Singh and Justice Rajesh Sekri holds that LPA under Rule 12 of the Letters Patent Rules of this Court is not maintainable because there is no provision in the Letters Patent Rules to entertain an intra court appeal against an order passed by a Single Judge of this Court in exercise of criminal jurisdiction.
DB while dismissing the LPA, observed that Chief Justice is vested with the powers to constitute a larger bench and make a reference only if conditions of Rule 33 of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court Rules, 1999 are satisfied.
This order has been passed in LPA filed by one Rohit Sharma against whom An FIR came to be registered against the appellant, by respondent No.2, on the directions of learned Additional Special Mobile Magistrate, Doda (hereinafter referred to as the trial court), on an application preferred by respondent No.1, in terms of Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1989 (for short, Cr.P.C.). The appellant invoked inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to implore for quashment of the said order dated 24.08.2023, passed by learned trial court, which petition came to be dismissed by learned Single Judge of this Court on 04.09.2023.
The appellant has invoked Rule 12 of Letters Patent Rules for quashment of both the orders dated 04.09.2023, passed by learned Single Judge of this Court and 24.08.2023 passed by learned trial court on multiple grounds urged in the memo of appeal.
DB after hearing both the sides observed that it is by far a crystallized position of law and no longer remains res Integra now that in terms of Rule 12 of Letters Patent of J&K, intra court appeal against an order passed by a Single Judge of this Court, in exercise of inherent powers envisaged under Section 482 Cr.P.C., is not maintainable. JNF