Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Robkar vs Abdul Gani Bhat on 27 November, 2019
Bench: Chief Justice, Sanjeev Kumar
S. No. 2
Advance list
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
AT SRINAGAR
ROBCR No. 1/2019 (Crl CP No. 1/2019)
Robkar
....Appellant/Petitioner(s)
Through: None
Vs.
Abdul Gani Bhat
....Respondent(s)
Through: Respondent present in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE
ORDER
27.11.2019
1. In response to the notice of show cause issued by this Court by an order dated 25th January, 2019, the respondent has filed the documents captioned "Reply to your show cause notice dated 25.01.2019 about "'contempt' committed by me" dated 31st January, 2019. Instead of showing the cause, the respondent has sought copies of documents which include copy of Court No. 9's cause list of 17th December, 2018; copy of order dated 17th December, 2018 passed by the said Court; copy of noting in the file; copy of office note of the Registry; copy of regular cause or supplementary cause list of the Court, copy of complaints allegedly addressed by the respondent to this Court; copy of complaints filed by the respondent to different authorities; copy of RTI application filed on 6th November, 2018 by the respondent; copy of several writ petitions and ROBCR No. 1/2019 (Crl CP No. 1/2019 Page 1 of 2 complaints including transfer petition filed by the respondent. The documents which are being demanded by the respondent are all in the public domain. For instance, the cause list and the orders passed by this Court are available on the website of the Court which is in public domain. In any case the respondent had appeared before the learned Single Judge on 17th December, 2018 and order was passed referring the matter for initiation of Contempt proceedings. Other than this document, all other documents of complaints and applications filed by the respondent himself as well would have been in his possession. The request made in his "reply" dated 31st January, 2019 is merely a dilatory tactic intended to be adopted in the present matter.
2. The request for copies of these documents is rejected.
3. We may also note that the respondent is a habitual litigant who is well conversant with the Court procedures and all matters relating thereto. The request for these documents is made maliciously with mala fide intention.
4. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, one and the very last opportunity is given to the respondent to show cause as to why contempt proceedings be not initiated against him. Such response shall be positively filed within three weeks from today, failing which, it will be presumed that the respondent has nothing to say in his response and this Court shall proceed in the matter in accordance with the law.
5. List on 23rd December, 2019.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) (GITA MITTAL)
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
SRINAGAR
27.11.2019
"Manzoor"
MANZOOR UL HASSAN
DAR
2019.11.30 12:30 No. 1/2019
ROBCR (Crl CP No. 1/2019 Page 2 of 2