Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Fazal Ahmed And Ors vs Ut Of J&K And Ors on 25 August, 2025
Sr. No. 25
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
CRM(M) No. 521/2021
Fazal Ahmed and Ors. .....Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
q
Through: Mr. M. Y. Akhoon, Advocate.
vs
UT of J&K and Ors. ..... Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Eishaan Dadhichi, GA for R-1.
Mr. P. N. Bhat, Advocate for R-2 & 3.
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SEKHRI, JUDGE
ORDER
25.08.2025
01. Petitioners have invoked inherent jurisdiction of this Court for
quashment of FIR No. 311/2021 for offences under Sections 354/341/109
IPC registered at Police Station, Surankote, inter alia, on the ground that
allegations made in the FIR are so absurd and inherently improbable that no
person on the basis of these allegations can reach at a conclusion that there
is a sufficient ground for proceeding against them.
02. As factual narration of the present case would unfurl, the private
respondent on 24.08.2021 lodged a written complaint against the
petitioners alleging inter alia that on 22.08.2021 at about 11:00 hours when
she was present in her dhara (a temporary abode), petitioner Aftab Ahmed
entered into her dhara, caught her by breasts and torn her clothes. On
raising hue and cry, her father and one Munir Ahmed from the
neighbourhood reached the spot and rescued her. The complainant goes on
to allege that on the same day when her father was going to cut grass, the
petitioners restrained his way and beat him, in furtherance of common
criminal intention. On the receipt of this report, impugned FIR came to be
registered.
2 CRM(M) No. 521/2021
03. This Court is vested with inherent jurisdiction to prevent the abuse of
the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice,
however, it is settled position of law that if the allegations made in the
complaint or the FIR, as the case may be, prima facie disclose the
commission of cognizable offence/offences, the investigation, at the
threshold, cannot be stifled.
04. A perusal of the status report filed by the official respondents reveals
that during investigation, the investigating officer has recorded statements
of the complainant and witnesses under Section 161 Cr. P. C. and offence
under Section 354-B IPC has been established against petitioner Aftab
Ahmed and offences under Sections 341/323/109 IPC have been made out
against petitioners Mohd. Arshad and Fazal Ahmed. The investigation is
complete and charge sheet is also prepared.
05. The High Court, in exercise of inherent jurisdiction, cannot embark
upon an inquiry as to the genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made
in the complaint. The pleas raised by the petitioners, in the present petition,
can be determined and tried in a full dressed trial only.
06. Viewed thus, the present petition being devoid of merit is dismissed
along with connected CM(s).
07. Interim direction, if any, shall stand vacated.
(Rajesh Sekhri)
Judge
Jammu
25.08.2025
Sushant
[ad_1]
Source link