SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(J&K) 1017

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
VAISHNO DEVI – Appellant
Versus
UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR TH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT – Respondent
WP(C) 1688 / 2021



Serial No. 18 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Champa Devi ….. Petitioner(s)

Through: Mr. Basit Manzoor Keng, Advocate Vs UT of J&K .….Respondent(s)

Through: Ms. Nazia Fazal, Advocate vice Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG Mr. Sheikh Altaf Hussian, Advocate Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE

ORDER

(03.11.2025)

1. This Court calls upon learned counsel for both sides to apprise this Court as to the true scope available for the complainant-cum-FIR maker to register his or her protest with respect to final police report presented under section 173 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 differing with the accusation of offences made by the FIR maker in the FIR and booking the accused persons for commission of offence/s other than the offence/s alleged in the complaint-cum-FIR.

2. In addition, learned counsel for the petitioner has a further point to say that learned Sessions Judge, Reasi has stumped the right of the petitioner, who was a complainant-cum-FIR maker, by holding that direction for further investigation into the case can be generated only from the Investigating Agency or for that matter, the Prosecution Agency, without any scope for the complainant-cum-FIR maker to press a plea for further investigation in the case acting upon the point that the original complaint-cum-FIR lodged by the complainant- cum-FIR maker was for commission of offences contrary to which the final police report under section 173 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was presented by the Police.

3. On this aspect, the case requires further clarification.

4. List for continuation on 10.11.2025

5. In the meantime, since the original complainant-cum-

FIR maker-Champa Devi has demised and in order to carry forward the matter to its logical end, her children i.e., daughters and sons have come forward with application CM No.5278/2025 seeking impleadment in her place.

6. For the reasons stated the application is allowed.

7. The following are the legal representatives of deceased petitioner:-

(i) Smt. Vaishno Devi W/o Ram Pal D/o Champa Devi R/o Bantalab, Jammu (ii) Smt. Chanchla Devi W/o Bhubneshwar Kumar D/o Champa Devi R/o H.No. 182, Sarwal Colony, Jammu.

(iii) Asha Rani W/o Ashok Kumar D/o Champa Devi R/o Raipur Bantalab, Jammu (iv) Sohani Paul S/o Late Sh. Mast and Champa Devi R/o Birpur Tehsil Bari Brahmana District Samba (v) Smt. Sushma Kumari W/o Mohan Lal D/o Champa Devi R/o Birpur Tehsil Bari Brahmana District Samba, all of whom are impleaded as petitioners in place of deceased petitioner-Champa Devi.

8. Fresh Memo of Parties be placed for updating the title of the case.

(RAHUL BHARTI)

JUDGE JAMMU

03.11.2025 Sneha

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top