Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Abdul Jaleel Kasana & Ors vs Ut Of J&K & Ors on 30 January, 2025
S. No. 14
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
Case:- CRM(M) No. 64/2025
CrlM Nos. 113 & 114/2025
Abdul Jaleel Kasana & Ors .....Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Tarun Sharma, Advocate
Vs
UT of J&K & Ors ..... Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Suneel Malhotra, GA for R-1
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE
ORDER
(30.01.2025)
CrlM No. 114/2025.
01. For the reasons stated in the application coupled with the submissions made
at the Bar, the same is allowed and the requirement of filing certified copy
of the complaint/summons titled ‘Suraj Parkash Parihar v Jalil Kasana’ is
dispensed with for the time being and the same shall be filed before the
next date of hearing.
02. Application is accordingly, disposed of.
CRM(M) No. 64/2025
03. The petitioners through the medium of instant petition are calling in
question the process being issued by the concerned District Magistrate,
Kishtwar on the basis of a complaint which has been received from one
Suraj Parkash Parihar, wherein certain allegations have been leveled
against the petitioners.
2 CRM(M) No. 64/2025
04. Mr. Tarun Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits
that there is a commercial transaction between the parties which pertains to
the completion of a contract and the Deputy Commissioner by issuing the
process on the basis of the aforesaid complaint, a copy of which has not
been supplied to the petitioners, has taken cognizance by giving a colour to
a civil dispute to a criminal case which is not permissible under law. Even
otherwise also, the complaint has been filed after a period of four years of
the execution of the work and thus no cognizance ought to have been taken
belatedly on the basis of said false and frivolous complaint by the Deputy
Commissioner as the very cognizance taken by the Deputy Commissioner
is beyond the scope and ambit of Criminal Procedure Code and, therefore,
the entire proceedings, according to the learned counsel, are required to be
quashed.
05. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners at length and perused the record.
06. Prima facie a case for indulgence is made out.
07. Issue notice to the respondents.
08. Mr. Suneel Malhotra, learned GA waives notice on behalf of respondent
No.1. He seeks and is granted four weeks time to file reply.
09. Now notice shall go to respondents 2 and 3 only returnable within four
weeks, subject to taking steps for service by the petitioners within one
week.
10. Registry is directed to summon the record from the learned District
Magistrate, Kishtwar with regard to the complaint titled ‘Suraj Parihar vs
3 CRM(M) No. 64/2025
Jalil Kasana & Ors’
11. List on 04.03.2025.
12. In the meantime, subject to objections from other side and till next date of
hearing before the Bench, the proceedings arising out of the complaint
titled ‘Suraj Parihar vs Jalil Kasana & Ors’, pending before the learned
District Magistrate, Kishtwar, shall remain stayed.
(WASIM SADIQ NARGAL)
JUDGE
JAMMU
30.01.2025
Vijay
[ad_1]
Source link