Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Bagh Hussain & Ors vs Ut Of J&K & Ors on 6 August, 2025
Sr.No. 24
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
Case: CRM(M) No. 897/2021
CrlM No. 2480/2021
CrlM No. 2481/2021
Bagh Hussain & Ors. .... Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s)
Through :- Mr. K. K. Pathan, Advocate
V/s
UT of J&K & Ors. ....Respondent(s)
Through :- Mr. Eishaan Dadhichi, GA
Mr. Nahiem Sheikh, Advocate
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SEKHRI, JUDGE
JUDGMENT
06.08.2025
ORAL
01. Petitioners have invoked inherent jurisdiction of this Court for quashment
of FIR No. 332/2021 dated 23.09.2021 registered with Police Station, Surankote
for offences under Sections 452, 323, 34 IPC inter alia on the ground of false
implication.
02. As factual narration of the present case would unfurl, the private
respondent No. 3, on 23.09.2021, lodged a written complaint against the
petitioners alleging, inter alia that on account of land dispute, at about 9:00
hours, they suddenly started beating her daughter, Iqbal Bi, while she was
cutting grass. On raising hue and cry, husband of the complainant reached the
spot and tried to save her daughter from the clutches of the petitioners-accused,
but they also started beating her husband. The complainant goes on to allege that
2 CRM(M) No. 897/2021
her husband and daughter somehow managed to escape and went to their house,
but the petitioners followed them, entered into her house and assaulted the whole
family and fled from the spot.
03. On the receipt of this report, the impugned FIR came to be registered
against the petitioners. During investigation, the investigating officer recorded
statements of material prosecution witnesses including the injured and obtained
medical certificate in this respect. The weapon of offence, Lathi was also
recovered from the scene of occurrence.
04. It also surfaced during investigation that a case, FIR No. 331/2021 under
Sections 452, 323, 147 and 148 IPC was already registered against the private
respondent, Maqbool Hussain and others. As per the Investigating Agency, the
said FIR was the reason that petitioner No. 1-Bagh Hussain and petitioner No. 3-
Layaqat Ali, in furtherance of common criminal intention restrained the private
respondent, Maqbool Hussain and others and started beat them with fists, blows
and lathis, as a result whereof, respondents, Maqbool Hussain, Rani Bi, Iqbal Bi
and Guddi Bi were injured.
05. According to the Investigating Agency, offences under Sections 341, 323,
324, 325, 34 IPC are proved against the petitioners/accused-Bagh Hussain and
Layaqat Ali and investigation has culminated in the final report.
06. The petitioners are aggrieved of the impugned FIR, primarily, on the
ground that it is a counter blast to FIR No. 331/2021 lodged by petitioner
No. 1.
07. A perusal of FIR No. 331/2021, stated to have been lodged by petitioner
No. 1, indicates that the occurrence in the said FIR came to happen on
3 CRM(M) No. 897/2021
23.09.2021, between 11:00 hours to 11:30 hours, whereas, the occurrence in the
present case is alleged to have taken place between 9:00 hours to 9:30 hours. It is
evident from the perusal of both the FIRs that there are two different occurrences
which took place on the same date.
08. This Court is vested with inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC
(now 528 BNSS) to prevent the abuse of the process of any law or otherwise to
secure the ends of justice.
09. It is trite that if allegation made in the FIR or the complaint, as the case
may be, taken in entirety at their face value, prima facie do not disclose the
commission of cognizable offence or where the allegations are absurd or
improbable or where criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with malafide to
wreak vengeance and instituted with an interior motive, this Court is justified to
exercise the inherent jurisdiction and quash the FIR or the complaint to prevent
the abuse of the process of law. However, a perusal of the impugned FIR and the
investigation prima facie discloses the commission of cognizable offences
against petitioners No. 1 & 3.
10. The plea taken by the petitioners that impugned FIR has been lodged by
the private respondent as a counter blast to the FIR lodged by petitioner No. 1
against the private respondent is required to be proved by them in defence during
the trial. At this stage, this Court, in exercise of inherent jurisdiction, cannot
embark upon an inquiry as to the genuineness or otherwise of the allegations
made in the FIR. As per the status report, offences have been made out against
the petitioners No. 1 and 3, namely, Bagh Hussain and Layaqat Ali.
4 CRM(M) No. 897/2021
11. Having regard to the above, the present petition being devoid of merit, is
dismissed along with connected CrlM(s). Insofar as petitioners No. 2 and 4 are
concerned, the petition against them has been rendered infructuous and is
dismissed.
12. Interim direction, if any, shall stand vacated.
(RAJESH SEKHRI)
JUDGE
Jammu:
06.08.2025
Meenakshi