news details |
|
|
| Full bench sets aside division bench judgement | | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Mar 18: A high court full bench of Chief Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar, Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice Tashi Rabstan today overruled a division bench decision in the case of Inderjeet Gupta v/s State of J&K, holding it in violation of Rule 148 of the J&K High Court Rules 1975.
After hearing the two sides, the bench directed the high court Registry to provide the translated copy of documents which the petitioner had sought for re-submission of the application.
The bench also directed Registry to issue English translated copy of the documents, which the petitioner had sought after collecting the necessary charges applicable for the issue of translated copies. The Registry was directed to provide the documents within four weeks from the date of re-submission of the application by the petitioner and the payment of charges.
The matter was directed to be listed before the full bench vide the April 16, 1990 order on the basis of the prayer sought in the petition to declare the judgment of Inderjeet Gupta v/s State of J&K and others as bad in law. The petitioner's counsel submitted that Rule 148 of the J&K High Court Rule, 1975 was not properly appreciated by the division bench while deciding the case -- Inderjeet Gupta v/s State of J&K and others -- and it had also failed to apply section 145 of the J&K Constitution, which declares that English shall continue to be official language of the state, including of the state high court. He argued that it was the constitutional right of the petitioner to get the copies of the documents supplied in English as he was not well versed in Urdu. He said the high court rules also mandated the Registry to issue copies of the translated versions of the documents on payment of charges, but the division bench totally misread the said provisions and rendered the judgment. Full Bench further observed that it is also an admitted fact that the proceeding in the High Court are conducted in English language even though, an option is mentioned in Rule 57(2) of the Jammu & Kashmir High Court Rules, 1975 stating that all judgments and orders shall be written, recorded, drawn and signed either in English or in Urdu. The High Court has to make use of English language to write judgments and orders. All the proceedings including filing, maintaining records, arguments and rendering judgments are in English language. The said position is not in dispute so long as the counsel arguing the case is not well versed with the language used in the documents, he is entitled to get translated copies of the documents in English language. The advocate or the party, who is arguing the case, must be in a position to understand and put forth his point of view to the court concerned for which he is required to get the documents translated into the language known to him or with which he is well versed. Access to justice includes extending all facilities to argue the case without any difficulty either to an Advocate or to a litigant. As the English being official language is continuously followed in this court for all purposes, Registry was not right in rejecting the application filed by the petitioner, which is in conflict with Rule 148 of the J&K High Court Rules, 1975, the full bench observed. The full bench observed that the division bench finding in the earlier proceedings was erroneous and could not be approved. "Similarly, the finding that no litigant has a right to use the Registry as its sub-office and to get the translation prepared by it of those documents which are in court language so as to prepare his case and it will be unfair on the part of the litigants, if they depend on the Registry to prepare their cases, is also unwarranted. This Court being a Court of equity and justice, cannot deny translated copies of the documents. If the division bench judgment is allowed to stand, the registry will be precluded from giving translated copy of the documents even if charges are paid by the applicant. Hence the decision of the division bench in the judgment reported in 1988 KLJ 90 (Inderjit Gupta v/s State of J&K and others) is overruled as it is in violation of Rule 148 of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court Rules, 1975," the full bench said. With these observations, it disposed of the petition. (JNF) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
