Sushil Kumar & Ors vs Ut Of J&K & Ors on 21 April, 2025

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Sushil Kumar & Ors vs Ut Of J&K & Ors on 21 April, 2025

Author: Sanjay Dhar

Bench: Sanjay Dhar

                                                                    Sr.No. 23


             HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                              AT JAMMU

                                                         CRM(M) No.335/2025

Sushil Kumar & Ors.                                            ....Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s)

                    Through :- Mr. Rohit Kotwal, Advocate.
                               (Through Virtual Mode)
V/s

UT of J&K & Ors.                                                          ....Respondent(s)


                  Through :-     None.
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE

                                      ORDER

(21.04.2025)

01. The petitioners have challenged FIR No.88/2024 for offences under

Sections 323/504/506/147 IPC registered with Police Station, Nowshera.

02. As per the allegations made in the impugned FIR, on 28.06.2024 at

about 12.10 p.m., the petitioners are alleged to have extracted sand and bajri in

an illegal manner and this was objected to by the complainant, the petitioners

attacked the complainant with clubs, fists and kicks. It is further alleged that the

petitioners attacked the complainant with an iron rod as also with stones, as a

result of which, the complainant suffered fractures on his left arm and got

injuries on other parts of the body. The complainant raised hue and cry and the

people gathered on spot to save him from the clutches of the petitioners or else

he would have been done to death.

03. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the allegations

made in the impugned FIR are absolutely false and frivolous and that the FIR

has been lodged with a view to implicate them in the false case. It has been
2

further submitted that there are contradictions in the impugned FIR and the

allegations made therein are improbable.

04. Heard and considered.

05. A bare perusal of the contents of the impugned FIR, as narrated herein

before, clearly indicate that cognizable offences are made out against the

petitioners. It has been clearly alleged in the impugned FIR that the petitioners

launched an attack upon the complainant. They gave beating to him with iron

rod and stones, kicks and fists which resulted in fracture to his left arm.

06. The veracity of allegations made in the FIR cannot be subject matter of

determination by this Court in these proceedings. It is only after the investigation

is conducted by the investigating agency that the veracity of the allegations can

be ascertained. This Court at this stage cannot go into the merits of the

contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioners. Once the allegations

made in the FIR disclose commission of cognizable offences, a statutory duty is

enjoined upon the investigating agency to undertake investigation of the case.

This Court cannot stifle the investigation of the case, particularly, when it is at

an initial stage.

07. For the foregoing reasons, I do not find any merit in this petition. The

same is dismissed, accordingly.

(SANJAY DHAR)
JUDGE
Jammu:

21.04.2025
Eva