Jammu & Kashmir High Court – Srinagar Bench
Abdul Qayoom Ganie And Ors vs Union Territory Of J&K And Ors on 5 June, 2025
Author: Sanjay Dhar
Bench: Sanjay Dhar
68
Supp
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) No. 296/2025
CM No. 700/2025
Abdul Qayoom Ganie and Ors.
..... Petitioner (s)
Through: Mr. Mudasir Bin Hassan, Adv.
V/s
Union Territory of J&K and Ors.
..... Respondent(s)
Through:
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar, Judge
ORDER
05.06.2025
1. The petitioners, through the medium of present petition
have challenged charge sheet emanating from FIR No.
52/2024 for offences under Section 142, 148, 323, 506 of
IPC registered with Police Station, Zainapora, Shopian.
2. As per allegations made in the FIR, respondent No. 3
lodged written report with the Police alleging therein that
on 23.06.2024, when he was undertaking repairs of his
house, the petitioners along with co-accused armed with
Page |2
WP(C) No. 296/2025
CM No. 700/2025
axes, knives and iron rods came over there and launched an
attack upon the complainant/respondent No. 4 as a result
of which, he received injuries on his head and other parts of
the body. Besides this, Tanveer Ahmad, Manzoor Ahmad
and Hameed Imran also received injuries on different parts
of their bodies.
3. On the basis of the aforesaid report, the impugned FIR came
to be registered and the investigation was set into motion.
As per the contents of the petition, after investigation of the
impugned FIR, charge sheet stands already filed before the
learned court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shopian.
4. The petitioners, have challenged the impugned proceedings
on the ground that petitioner No. 1 is working as Selection
Grade Constable in the Police and is posted at Ahstan
Sharief Jinab Sahib Soura. It has been submitted that on the
date of the incident, he was discharging his duty over there.
It has been further submitted that petitioner No. 2 is
working as Teacher at Higher Secondary School, Shopian
and on the date of the incident, he was discharging his duty
as Invigilator. Regarding petitioner No. 3, it has been
Page |3
WP(C) No. 296/2025
CM No. 700/2025
submitted that he is working as Lecturer in Higher
Secondary School, Keegam and he was also discharging his
duty at relevant point of time. Thus, according to the
petitioners, they were not present on spot at the time of the
incident, and as such, no offence is made out against them.
It has been submitted that the police has not investigated
the matter in its proper perspective and that respondent
No. 3 has lodged impugned proceedings with a view to
wreak vengeance upon the petitioners with whom he has
having a civil dispute.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused
the material on record
6. The contents of the impugned FIR which have already been
referred to hereinbefore, clearly disclose that the petitioners
and co-accused have launched an attack upon the
complainant and his other associates, which has resulted in
injuries to them. It is alleged in the impugned FIR, that the
petitioners were carrying weapons likes axes, knives and
iron rods at the time of the incident and they used these
weapons to inflict injuries upon the complainant and his
Page |4
WP(C) No. 296/2025
CM No. 700/2025
associates. Thus, allegations contained in the FIR clearly
disclose commission of cognizable offences against the
petitioners. The Investigating Agency, after investigating the
impugned FIR, have found substance in these allegations
which has resulted in filing of the charge sheet against the
petitioner.
7. The contention of the petitioners is that they were not
present on spot at the relevant point of time as they were
discharging their official duties at respective places of
theirposting and as such, the challan could not have been
filed against them. The plea of alibi put forward by the
petitioners cannot form a ground for quashing the
impugned challan in these proceedings. The veracity of the
defence put up by the petitioners can be gone into by the
trial court at the appropriate stage and this Court in exercise
of its powers under Section 528 of BNSS cannot hold a mini
trial to ascertain the veracity of the defence put up by the
petitioners. In case, the petitioners feel that their defence of
alibi has not been investigated by the Investigating Agency,
it is open to them to approach the learned trial Magistrate
Page |5
WP(C) No. 296/2025
CM No. 700/2025
before whom charge sheet has been filed and seek further
investigation of the case. But this Court in the present
proceedings cannot go into all these aspects of the matter
8. For the foregoing reasons, I do not find any merit in this
petition. The petition is dismissed accordingly.
(Sanjay Dhar)
Judge
SRINAGAR
05.06.2025
Aasif