Judgment

1. In the instant petition, the petitioners challenge to order of the learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Kashmir, Srinagar, dated 14th of May, 2021, passed in the application titled Sheikh Mohammad Aslam & Anr vs UT of J&K through Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch, Srinagar, Kashmir, and seek its quashment with further direction to release the amount of Rs. 9.00 lakhs in favour of the petitioners. The petitioners seek release of the seized amount as also quashment of order impugned dated 14th of May, 2021, on the grounds detailed out as under:

(a) That the order impugned dated 14-5-2021 is bad in law and has been passed by the Ld. court of Special Judge (Anti-Corruption) Srinagar in a most casual and mechanical manner. It is submitted that while passing the order impugned, the Ld. court of Special Judge (Anti-Corruption) Srinagar has not correctly appreciated the facts and circumstances attendant to the case of the petitioners vis-à-vis the release of cash amount of Rs. 9.00 lakhs which was taken out from the possession of the petitioners and seized by the respondent during the search. It is submitted that in the order impugned dated 14-5-2021, the main ground for rejection of the prayer of the petitioners for seeking release of the cash amount has been based on the fact that the investigation of the case was at its initial stage and the release of the money at this stage would defeat very purport of the investigation. Besides, it has also been stated by the Ld. court of Special Judge (Anti-Corruption) Srinagar that the release of the money at this stage would hamper the investigation of the case. The application has been held to be premature as such came to be rejected by the Ld. court of Special Judge (Anti-Corruption) Srinagar. It is submitted that grounds taken by the Ld. court of Special Judge (Anti-Corruption) Srinagar for rejecting the application filed by the petitioners are unreasonable, unjust and unfounded as the Ld. court of Special Judge (Anti-Corruption) Srinagar has failed to return any finding with reference to the seizure of the money which was taken out from the possession of the petitioner No. 2. On one hand, the Ld. Trial court has stated that petitioner No. 1 has not been arrayed as accused in the FIR while as on the other hand, it has been stated that the name of the petitioner is also reflected in the case diary as an accused. Besides, the trial court has also stated that the petitioners are none other than the parents of the ‘accused public servant’ who was accused in the misappropriated money related to the case. In this regard, it is submitted that the son of the petitioners is not a public servant as is clearly reflected in the police report as well as objections filed by the respondent. However, the Ld. Trial court has wrongly held that the son of the petitioner (accused) was a public servant. On this count alone, the order impugned is bad in law as such deserves to be quashed at the very outset.

(b) That the Ld. Court below has also failed to appreciate the averments made in the report filed by the respondent. It is submitted that from the bare perusal of the report which had been filed by the respondent police before the court below, it transpired that FIR No. 18/2021 pertains to execution of the works by JKPCC in the year 2015. The allegation against the son of the petitioner namely Sheikh Zubair Aslam has been that in the year 2017, he worked as Peace Worker and an amount of Rs. 1,12,57,000/- had been paid to him and his father and uncle. The said amount was adjusted against the works found executed mostly on account of providing materials like Marbles/Granite and Iron etc. Out of the amount of Rs. 1,12,57000/- an amount of Rs. 11.00 lakhs is claimed to have been unrecovered amount and on the basis of this un-adjusted amount, favoritism and violation of rules and regulations has been alleged forming basis for roping the son of the petitioners in the FIR. It has been alleged th