GH RASOOL BHAT Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IMPUGNED in this petition is an order purported to have been passed by Special Judge Anticorruption Srinagar on 28.02.2004, on petitioners application for implementation of an earlier order dated 16.01.2002, on the ground that the same was passed in his absence thereby depriving him of the interest payable there under and as such, involves violation of the principles of natural justice particularly because of having been passed in total disregard to the factual and legal situation attending the matter and without proper application of mind. Accordingly the petitioner seeks quashment thereof with a direction to respondent No.2 for payment of interest to the petitioner in terms of the Anticorruption Courts Judgment dated 16.01.2002. During course of his threshold submissions, petitioners counsel has further elucidated the matter by stating that a particular amount otherwise payable to petitioner was frozen by concerned bank under orders of the Court below but at conclusion of the trial it was directed to be released in his favour along with, interest, which was not done and hence the petition.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel and considered the matter. It appears that after having a particular amount frozen in connection with trial of the case being FIR No. 16/93 of Vigilance Organisation under sections 5(1) and 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act read with section 420, 467,467 -A, 201 and 120 -B of RPC, the Court of Special Judge Anticorruption vide order dated 16.01.2002 directed the bank to release the said amount in favour of one Gh. Rasool Bhat S/o Amma Bhat R/o Furrah Anantnag along with interest accumulated there upon. The Bank in compliance of said order agreed to payment of the amount without interest as it had been kept in a current account and as such, did not earn any interest at all. This prompted the petitioner to file another application before the Court below on 14 -02 -2004 which was disposed of under the impugned order with an observation that present petitioner Gh. Nabi Beigh had no locus -standi in the matter because the amount of Rs.2,95,1OO/ - earlier frozen had been directed to be released in favour of one Gh. Rasool and not the present petitioner who had no claim thereto whatsoever. While dismissing his claim, the Court below also directed that aforesaid amount be paid to the original beneficiary of its order dated 16.01.2002 namely Gh. Rasool Bhat whenever he appears.

(3.) AGGRIEVED thereby, the present petitioner on 4th of March 2002 filed another application before court below requesting for modification of order dated 16.01.2002 to the extent of making the amount aforesaid payable to him instead of Gh. Rasool Bhat, the original beneficiary, as his attorney; on the ground that he had already made payment of said amount to said Gh. Rasool Bhat. After hearing him and the other side, Court below dismissed the modification application also on the ground that allowing modification would amount to review of earlier order which was not provided for. Not satisfied therewith the petitioner litigated the matter in this Court through Criminal Revision No. 25/04 captioned as "Gh. Rasool Bhat Vs. State" which too was dismissed by a bench of this Court on 21.10.2005, with an observation that the order impugned in revision petition being interlocutory could be rejected on thatgroundonly but incidence Constanceâ„¢s was dismissed after full consideration of the merits involved. The Court of Special Judge Anticorruption Srinagar only after that order that the present petition appears to have been instituted impugning the original order as passes it.