Jammu and Kashmir HC dismisses petition against Punjab authorities citing territorial jurisdiction

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court recently refused to entertain a criminal writ petition against Punjab Chief Secretary and the Assistant Commissioner of Police of Jalandhar on the ground they are not within the territorial limits of the High Court [Thakur Ashwani Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr].Justice Rahul Bharti rejected the petitioner's contention that there exists no mandate to plead how the jurisdiction of a given High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was invoked against the officials of Punjab.The counsel representing the petitioner referred to Rule 2 of the Writ Proceedings Rules, 1997 to plead that the writ proceedings rules do not mandate a petitioner to plead cause of action related averments in the writ petition. .However, the Court said the petition was reading the rules as if Article 226 of Constitution of India "was sub-serving to the writ proceedings rules.""Article 226 clause-1 of the Constitution of India is loaded with a requirement that any High Court is to exercise writ jurisdiction provided the person or authority/ies is/are within the territorial domain of said jurisdiction and if ex-facie the persons or authorities are not falling within the domain of the said jurisdiction then it becomes an unavoidable compulsion for a writ petitioner to first assert and allege that how come an extra-territorial located person or authority is being intended to be subjected to writ jurisdiction of a given High Court," it added..The petition was moved by one Thakur Ashwani Singh to challenge the notices issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Police of Jalandhar in connection with a business-related dispute..The Court said the petition contained no pleadings establishing how the cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of the High Court."Thus, the petitioner self-invited the dismissal of this writ petition before it came to be filed by omitting to make any pleading worth name for this court to assume the jurisdiction in the matter and examine the matter on merits for which purpose the petitioner came forward seeking quashment of impugned notices, hence, this writ petition is found to be not maintainable before this court on account of lack of territorial jurisdiction," it said.Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition..Advocate Rahul Sharma appeared for the petitioner.Senior Additional Advocate General (AAG) Monika Kohli appeared for the respondents.[Read Order]