JAMMU & KASHMIR HIGH COURT AT JAMMU
Janak Raj Kotwal, J.
Sunil Kumar - Appellant
Versus
State of J&K and Ors. - Resopndent
Pet. u of s 561-A No. 156 of 2014 and Cr.M.A. No. 179 of 2014
Decided On : 29-11-2014
561-A Cr.P.C. - Quashing of FIR - Sections 166, 167, 468, 471, 470 and 109 RPC - The court discussed the relevant acts and sections, highlighting the abuse of process of the court in directing investigation without resolving the civil dispute, and quashed the FIR and the basic complaint.
Fact of the Case:
The respondent filed a complaint against the petitioner and others, alleging tampering of land records. The Magistrate directed an inquiry and subsequently ordered the registration of an FIR under sections 166, 167, 468, 471, 470 and 109 RPC.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the direction for investigation and criminal proceedings without resolving the civil dispute amounted to an abuse of process of the court.
Issues: The issues revolved around the legality of the FIR and the order directing its registration, as well as the abuse of process of the court in commencing criminal proceedings without resolving the civil dispute.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that directing investigation without resolving the civil dispute amounted to an abuse of process of the court.
Final Decision: The court quashed the FIR and the basic complaint.
Janak Raj Kotwal, J.:-
1. This is a petition under section 561-A Cr.P.C., whereby petitioner geeks to invoke inherent jurisdiction of this Court under section 561-A Cr.P.C. for quashing complaint No. 113 filed by respondent No. 2 against him in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Glass, Thanamandi and FIR No. 41/2014 registered on the basis of said complaint at Police Station, Thanamandi for offences u/ss. 166, 167, 468, 471, 470 and 109 RPC. Heard. I have perused the record.
2. I may, first state, briefly, the facts which are relevant and undisputed:
2.1 Respondent No. 2, Zenat Begum filed complaint against the petitioner and four others in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Thanamandi. She stated that State land comprised in khasra No. 359 min measuring 2 marlas was mutated in the name of her husband, Munshi Khan, under Mutation No. 723 in the year 1996. Her husband has constructed a house on the said land along with shops on its roof and is in continuous possession thereof. She alleged that pursuant to a conspiracy hatched by Badar Hussain (accused No. 5) with Revenue Officials (accused 1 to 4), revenue entry as regards the above mentioned land has been tampered and land measuring 1 marla has been shown as a shop comprised in khasra No. 178 possessed by accused No. 5. In this complaint, petitioner, who at the relevant time was posted as Tehsildar, Thanamandi, has been arraigned as accused No. 4.
2.2 Petitioner has produced a copy of order passed by the learned Magistrate on 01.04.2014. This order on perusal shows that the complaint was filed on 29.03.2013 when the learned Magistrate on taking cognizance postponed issue of process and directed an inquiry in terms of section 202 Cr.P.C. by the police concerned. In compliance with the order of learned Magistrate, Sub Divisional Police Officer(SDPO), Thanamandi submitted a detailed report to the Magistrate vide his No. Clt-U/S/202 Cr.PC/2013/2910/SDPO dated 03.08.2013. Learned Magistrate on consideration of the report of inquiry officer, averments in the complaint and the initial statements of the complainant and witnesses recorded at the time of filing of the complaint, stated in the order dated 01.04.2014 (supra) that "there is material on record to proceed against the accused persons under sections 166, 167, 468, 471, 470 and 109 RPC". Learned Magistrate, however, instead of proceeding against the accused and issuing process against them, directed SHO, Police Station, Thanamandi to register FIR against the accused persons as also all those who are involved or beneficiaries for the commission of these offences. In that, learned Magistrate made an observation, which I reproduce verbatim:
"So far taking of cognizance in the present case is concerned this court has power to take cognizance in the matter and proceed against the accused persons. But in case this court take cognizance against the accused persons it will be very difficult to seize record in which accused person has done the tampering. Beside this if investigation will be done by the police agency other persons who are behind the present nexus will be brought on the record".
2.3 Pursuant to the order passed by the learned Magistrate on 01.04.2014, police registered FIR No. 41/2014 dated 12.04.2014 under sections 166, 167, 468, 471, 470 and 109 RPC.
3. Quashing of the FIR as well as the basic complaint is sought by petitioner (accused No. 4) on the grounds that the complaint has been filed on "baseless grounds only to harass the petitioner, who is a senior officer of the Government and has acted in his official capacity." It is contended that the report of the SDPO makes it clear that Badar Hussain is in possession of land measuring 1 marla and has constructed a shop on it and the petitioner therefore, was competent to direct attestation of mutation in his name. Attestation of mutation was directed by him after adopting due course of law. The complaint has been filed, notwithstanding th
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.