JAVEED AHMAD BHAT Vs. SONA ULLAH SHEIKH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and going through the material on record, it appears that proceedings have been initiated against the present petitioner in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Shopian. The petitioner herein has appeared before the said Court and submitted his bail bonds for ensuring his presence to face trial. He has later violated the conditions of bail which has lead the Court to forfeit his bail in terms of order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Shopian, on 18/7/2014, annexed with the petition ( as annexure VI). Thereafter the presence of the petitioner has been sought to be ensured by issuance of coercive measures and so non-bailable warrants have been issued.

(2.) The petitioner is canvassing in terms of instant petition that the learned trial Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. A reference to objections said to have been filed before trial Court is also made, wherein it had been also stated that payment covered by the cheques referred in the complaint stands paid by the petitioner herein. To put it in the words of petitioner as narrated in the objections filed by the petitioner herein before the trial Court:

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court titled Vinay Kumar Sailendra v. Delhi High Court, reported in (2014) 10 SCCC 708 and Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod v. State of Maharashtra and Another, reported in 2014 AIAR (Criminal) 835 in support of his contentions.