District Court dismisses plea to provide copy of order in Hindi language

The Additional District and Sessions Court of Chandigarh has dismissed the plea of a 75-year-old Chandigarh resident who challenged the order of Magistrate Court, wherein his request to supply a copy of the order on a private criminal complaint in Hindi language had been dismissed.

Guriqbal Singh had moved a complaint under section 156 (3) of the CrPC at the Chandigarh district court in June 2018, seeking registration of FIR against few persons following a land dispute. After hearing the matter, the Magistrate (JMIC) Court dismissed the plea for registration of FIR in September 2018.

After the dismissal of his complaint from the Magistrate Court, Singh moved an application in May 2019 that he should be provided the dismissal order copy in Hindi language, since he had submitted the complaint in Hindi language too. However, the application was dismissed. Singh thus filed an appeal against the Magistrate Court order at the ADJ Court in August 2019.

Advocate Ajay Kumar Sharma, counsel for Singh, contended in the ADJ court that the work being conducted in English language in all the district courts in Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh is illegal and wrong. He argued that his revision petition has been pending for the last two years and should be decided and even said that the predecessor of this court did not decide this revision petition despite his request for dismissing the same. He argued that this court should dismiss the revision petition so that the revisionist/complainant can approach the Punjab and Haryana High Court for his rights.

After hearing the complainant’s plea, the court of Jaibir Singh, Additional Sessions Judge, said, “This court is stunned to see the agitating conduct of counsel for the revisionist/complainant, even on first appearance before this court and instead of assisting the court in the proper manner he stated straightaway that his revision petition may be dismissed. The revisionist/complainant filed a complaint against 10 respondents and prayed for sending the same under Section 156(3) CrPC. However, the learned trial court disallowed the prayer of the revisionist/complainant vide order dated September 10, 2018.”

“It is his grudge that as he had filed the complaint in Hindi language, therefore, the order dated September 10, 2018 should have been supplied to him in Hindi language, which is the court language. That prayer of the revisionist/complainant was declined vide order dated May 22, 2019 stating that the order has been passed in English language and the copy of that order had already been supplied to the revisionist/complainant in English language,” read the court order.

The court of Jaibir Singh said that counsel for the complainant did not provide assistance to the court and when the court sought clarification from him in respect of the proviso as contained in High Court rules and orders Vol.I.CH.1-N in respect of “Court language”, he straightaway stated that the present revision petition may be dismissed as he wants to approach the High Court in this respect.

“In these circumstances, this court did not see any irregularity, illegality and impropriety in the order dated May 22, 2019 passed by the trial court,” the court said and dismissed the complaint.

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button