Anzar Ahmed Mir vs Mohd. Latief on 3 January, 2025

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Anzar Ahmed Mir vs Mohd. Latief on 3 January, 2025

Author: Rahul Bharti

Bench: Rahul Bharti

                                                          Serial No. 34


         HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                         AT JAMMU
Case:-    CRM(M) No. 19/2025
          CrlM No. 39/2025

Anzar Ahmed Mir                                               .....Petitioner(s)

                     Through: Mr. Tanzir Khatana, Advocate.

                Vs

Mohd. Latief                                             ..... Respondent(s)

                     Through: None.

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE

                                   ORDER

(03.01.2025)

1. From a perusal of the impugned order dated 09.12.2024

passed by the court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Mendhar, the

conduct of the petitioner as an accused in the complaint is self

evident that he is taking the trial of the complaint before the criminal

court as a matter of his convenience.

2. The learned trial Magistrate, thus, constrained by repeated

non-appearances of the petitioner in attending the complaint

proceedings was left with no other option but to direct non-bailable

warrants against the petitioner to be executed through the SSP Poonch

for ensuring the personal appearance of the petitioner.

3. This Court finds no reason to interfere in the discretion and

the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Mendhar. The

petitioner in his petition has nowhere stated as to why he is not

causing appearance in the trial of the complaint particularly when the

complaint is pending adjudication since 2016.
2 CRM(M) No. 19/2025

4. The court is refraining from making any observation with

respect to the mind set with which the petitioner must be taking the

pending criminal complaint on account of his status as being once the

SHO of the Police Station Mendhar and presently posted in the

Vigilance Organization, Anti Corruption Bureau, Jammu.

5. This Court finds no reason to interfere for the sake of

quashment of the complaint so pending and, therefore, dismisses the

present petition. The petitioner is directed to ensure his personal

presence before the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Mendhar on the next

date of hearing fixed in the case which is said to be 10.02.2025.

6. In the event of the petitioner not appearing in person before

the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Mendhar on 10.02.2025, then the

Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Mendhar shall be well within his/her

discretion to direct issuance of non-bailable warrants against the

petitioner for securing his presence in the complaint case.

7. A copy of this order be forwarded to the Judicial Magistrate

1st Class, Mendhar for notice and record sake.

8. In view of the above, the order of the Judicial Magistrate 1 st

Class, Mendhar directing issuance of non-bailable warrants against

the petitioner which was actually meant for appearance on 30.12.2024

shall be deemed to have lapsed.

(RAHUL BHARTI)
JUDGE
JAMMU
03.01.2025
Shivalee

Shivalee Khajuria
2025.01.14 12:39
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document