2007 Supreme(J&K) 88
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR
Bashir Ahmad Kirmani, J.
Ab. Rashid & Ors. - Appellant
Versus
State & Anr. - Respondent
Cr. Revision No. 48/2004
Decided On : 25 May, 2007
Advocate For Appellant: Z.A. Qureshi
Advocate For Appellant: M.I. Qadiri
Advocate For Respondent: M.A. Rathore
Headnote:Criminal Procedure Code-Section 561-A-Quashment of Proceeding-petitioners contention regarding committal magistrates lack of power to take cognizance of the matter in absence of sanction under section 197 Cr.P.C and Section 7 of Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1990 or power of police to institute the case. As a matter of fact if the petitioner seriously believed it, nothing prevented him to appear before police concerned or the committal Court and take these pleas which would obviously be disposed of on their merit. Ex-facie the consideration involved in the assessment of their substance would be as to whether or not the act attributed to petitioner would in circumstances of the case be traced to discharge of lawful duty by him as to something done towards or during its performance. This too could have been considered by the Courts below more effectively as being the Courts of first instance, and by choosing to stay away the petitioner has only deprived himself of the opportunity to present his case on this count or regarding exercise of his option regarding choice of the forum of trial as well.
2. On receiving the report police registered FIR No. 173/1997 under sections 302 364, and 109 RPC and started investigations during which they claim to have prepared the recovery and injury memos alongwith map of the alleged scene of occurrence and arrested accused Muhammad Sultan Mir. The police also claim to have been informed that the local army unit of Kumaun rifles had lifted the boy which was denied by concerned Commanding Officer. Vide order No. 1447 of 1999 dated: 21.05.1999 issued by Police headquarters investigation of the case was assigned to crime branch who recommenced the same and recorded statements of witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C. On completion of investigation they concluded that on 19.06.1997 the daughter of accused No.3 namely Jameela Akhtar informed her mother that the deceased Ghulam Nabi Malik had molested her when she went to his shop for purchasing some under-garments whereafter the deceased went to the house of 3rd accused for explaining his position where he was beaten etc. The investigation reportedly also revealed that accused No.l the brother of 3rd accused who was posted as SGCT in Ganderbal police station and had contacts with one of the police informers, the accused Mohammad Sultan Mir, organized a raid on the house of deceased on 21.06.1997 at around 9 PM and accompanied by accused 1 to 4 who were dressed in army uniform lifted the deceased and despite efforts the complainant could not have a case registered in police station in time because of the covert activities of first accused, who prevented and persuaded the complainant to get in touch with accused Mohammad Sultan Mir who was working in State Task Force but nothing happened till ultimately the dead body was recovered from power Canal of Ganderbal tied in a rope and bearing torture marks. During interrogation the accused Mohmmad Sultan Mir who became an approver in the case had his statement recorded before the competent magistrate under sec. 164 Cr.P.C on 01.09.2003 according to which the accused No.5 namely Maj. Parera of 3rd Kamanoon Rifles who was posted in Ganderbal at that time was stated to have been involved in commission of the offences and disposal of the dead body on a promise that the accused would given him Pashmina Shawl costing Rs. 60,000/-.
3. The police ultimately concluded that the deceased was tortured to death by accused persons Maj. Parera and Abdul Rashid Sofi and ultimately they instituted a case before City Magistrate, Srinagar on 27.10.2003, against accused including aforesaid Maj. Parera, Mohammad Sultan Mir, the approver and Abdul Rashid Sofi, who committed the same to Court of Sessions where it came up on 29.10.2003 only to be returned for reconsideration of committal order on the ground that learned com