The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has expressed serious concern over the practice of litigants producing photostat copies of case documents directly from court records instead of obtaining certified copies of the same [Fayaz Ahmed Sheikh vs Qamar Un Nisa].
Justice Rahul Bharti observed that the Court has been coming across such practices in both civil and criminal cases, where annexures attached to a petition are photocopies of the trial court's file, rather than certified copies obtained through the prescribed legal procedure.
“This Court is coming across with petition relatable to the proceedings of civil as well as criminal cases wherein the annexures which have come to accompany the petition are uncertified copies but taken in photostat formfrom the Court record itself meaning thereby the concerned clerk of a given Court is allowing the access to a litigant to have the document of the court file taken in photostat form and place it as annexure before this Court," the Court said.
This type practice is a pointer to the fact that the the case document procurement is not by fair means, the Court added.
Taking note of the issue, the Court called upon the Registrar General of the High Court to issue strict instructions to all presiding officers (judges) across courts in the Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh to prevent such practices.
The Court warned that if petitions in future contain uncertified photocopies obtained from court records, explanations may be sought from both the concerned clerks and the presiding officers of the respective courts.
"The learned Registrar General, High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, to pass on requisite strict instructions/directions to the Presiding Officers of all the Courts in the UT of Jammu and Kahmir as well as UT of Ladakh that in case in future this Court would come across with any such document presented in connection with any petition filed before this Court, the explanation would be warranted equally from the Presiding Officer/s as well as concerned clerk/s," the Court's February 13 order said.
Advocate Saqib Shabir appeared for the petitioner.
[Read Order]