Jammu & Kashmir High Court Grants Stay on Punjab FIR Investigation, Citing J&K Incidents as Primary Cause

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh recently issued a stay on an investigation into a First Information Report (FIR) registered in Patiala. The order, which was issued by Justice MA Chowdhary, noted that the major part of the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court [Anshul Garg v State of Punjab].

The petition arose in relation to an FIR registered at Patiala for the offences of criminal breach of trust, cruelty, causing miscarriage without consent, and criminal conspiracy. The petitioners, who were accused in the case, resided within the court’s jurisdiction.

The petitioners argued that their wife had registered the complaint raising false allegations as a counter blast to his petition for judicial separation before a family court in Jammu. They also underscored that most of the incidents cited in the complaint took place in Jammu and Kashmir, where the petitioner was posted.

The Court while staying the proceedings, issued notice on the plea seeking quashing of the FIR. The order stated that, “Since most of the allegations levelled against the petitioners relate to the incidents in J&K including subjecting the complainant respondent no. 04 to cruelty and causing miscarriage in the state of J&K, therefore, this court is having jurisdiction to entertain this petition as ’cause of action’ though not wholly but major parts of that has arisen, within the territorial limits of this court.”

The Court placed reliance on the case of Navinchandra N Majithia v State of Maharashtra, wherein the Supreme Court had held that the High Court before which a writ petition is filed must ascertain whether any part of the cause of action arose within its jurisdiction and this would depend on the facts of each case.

The High Court agreed to hear the plea and stayed investigation into the FIR, allowing the respondents to file counter affidavits within four weeks. The case will now be heard on July 19.