##PAGE1##

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT SRINAGAR

CRMC No. 323/2018

Reserved on: 20.12.2025

Pronounced on : 29.12.2025

Uploaded on: 29.12.2025

Whether the operative part or

full judgment is pronounced: “FULL”

Abdul Majid Bhat ...Applicant(s)/Petitioner(s)

S/o Khazir Mohammad Bhat

R/o Chursoo, Awantipora

A/p Bagh-e-Mehtab, Srinagar

Through: - Ms. Sharaf Wani, Advocate with

Mr. Ahmad Basaud, Advocate

v/s

1. Commissioner/Secretary to Government, ...Respondent(s)

General Administration Department,

Civil Secretariat, Jammu/Srinagar

2. Commissioner, Vigilance Commission,

Srinagar

3. Sr. Superintendent of Police,

Vigilance Organization, Kashmir, Srinagar

Through:- Mr. Mohsin Qadri, Sr. AAG with

Ms. Maha Majeed, Assisting Counsel

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE

JUDGMENT

1. The petitioner, a public servant who at the relevant time was posted as

Assistant Regional Transport Officer, Shopian, has challenged FIR No.

25/2018 dated 14-07-2018 registered against him for the alleged

commission of offences under Section 5(1)(e) read with Section 5(2) of

the J&K Prevention of Corruption Act, Svt. 2006. The challenge is

founded on the assertion that the allegations levelled in the FIR are vague,

baseless, and devoid of material particulars. It is contended that despite

the petitioner having sufficiently and satisfactorily explained the source

and ownership of the properties alleged to be in his possession, the

respondents have mechanically proceeded to accuse him of possessing

assets disproportionate to his known sources of income. Allegations have

also been made that the petitioner, in his capacity as registering authority,

issued illegal licences, registrations, and payment vouchers; however, it is

emphasized that till date not a single licence or registration certificate has

either been investigated or found to be illegal.

2. It is further contended that the allegation regarding possession of cash

amounting to ₹34,13,300/- is misconceived, as the said amount was seized

from various persons including the petitioner’s mother and aunt, and the

same has been duly accounted for. As regards the immovable properties,

the two houses at Srinagar alleged to have been purchased in the name of

the petitioner’s wife are stated not to be owned by the petitioner. The

property falling under Khasra No. 673 at Rose Lane Colony, Bagh-e-

Mehtab, Srinagar, alleged to have been purchased by the petitioner in the

name of his wife, Nahida Parveen, is asserted to have been purchased by

her father in the year 2005 and subsequently mutated in her name.

Similarly, the industrial unit styled as “SSL Cardboard Factory” at

Hariparigam is claimed to belong to a different partnership concern in

which the petitioner has no role whatsoever. The allegation regarding

ownership of “Dawut Restaurant” at Awantipora is also denied, the

petitioner asserting that the said establishment is owned by one Ishtiaq

Mehmood. The ownership of vehicles attributed to the petitioner has

likewise been stated to have been satisfactorily explained.

CRMC No. 323/2018 Page 2 of 16

3. The petitioner contends that mere possession of pecuniary resources does

not constitute an offence under Section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption

Act unless it is established that such possession could not be satisfactorily

accounted for, which, according to him, is not the case here. It is alleged

that despite submission of all relevant documents, the respondents have

failed to take the same into consideration, thereby revealing a mala fide

intent to falsely implicate and harass the petitioner. It is further urged that

the FIR does not disclose the identity of the complainant, the material that

led to initiation of inquiry, or the authority which ordered such inquiry

and registration of the FIR. The respondents are accused of acting in

violation of Rule 23 of the J&K State Vigilance Commission Rules, 2013,

by failing to submit the secret verification report to the Vigilance

Commission for approval prior to registration of the FIR. The p