J&K High Court has issued a strict warning to clerks and judges, stating that if future petitions include uncertified photocopies from court records, both the responsible clerks and presiding officers may be required to provide explanations.
The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has raised significant concerns regarding the practice of litigants submitting photocopies of case documents derived directly from court records, rather than acquiring certified copies through the proper legal channels.
Justice Rahul Bharti noted that the court has encountered this issue in both civil and criminal cases, where the annexures accompanying petitions are photocopies from the trial court’s files rather than certified copies obtained legally.
The Court stated,
“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 form from 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 emphasized that this practice indicates that the procurement of case documents is not being conducted fairly.
In light of this issue, the Court has instructed the Registrar General of the High Court to issue strict directives to all presiding officers (judges) in the Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh to curb such practices.
Moreover, the Court warned that if future petitions are found to contain uncertified photocopies sourced from court records, both the pertinent clerks and presiding officers of the respective courts will be required to provide explanations.
The Court’s order from February 13 stated,
“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 Kashmir 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,”
Advocate Saqib Shabir represented the petitioner.
Case Title: Fayaz Ahmed Sheikh vs Qamar Un Nisa