HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT

SRINAGAR

Reserved on: 13.05.2022

Pronounced on: 18.05.2022

CRM(M) No.233/2021

CrlM No.863/2021

MOHAMMAD SHAHNAWAZ KHAN

…PETITIONER(S)

Through: Mr. Shuja-ul-Haq, Advocate.

Vs.

UT OF J&K & ORS.

….RESPONDENT(S)

Through: Mr. Irfan Andleeb, Dy. AG.

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

ORDER(ORAL)

13.05.2022

1)

The petitioner has challenged FIR No.20/2021 for offences under

Section 4-A of J&K Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 120-B

RPC registered with Police Station, Anti Corruption Bureau, Srinagar.

2)

As per the impugned FIR, one Bisma Nawaz lodged a report

alleging therein that the then SHO, Police Station, Soura demanded

illegal gratification through ASI Mohammad Ashraf from her and her

father as a motive or reward for registering FIR pursuant to order dated

10.11.2018 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srinagar, whereby the

SHO was directed to proceed under Section 156(3) of the Cr. P. C in the

light of the complaint filed by the complainant before the Chief Judicial

Magistrate.

2 CRM(M) No.233/2021

3)

It appears that the complainant Bisma Nawaz had presented a

complaint before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srinagar, alleging therein

that one Parvaiz Ahmad Sheikh had subjected her to sexual abuse. When

the complainant approached the SHO, P/S Soura, for registration of FIR,

he showed reluctance and demanded illegal gratification. It was further

alleged in the complaint that when the complainant failed to meet the

demand of the SHO, she approached the Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Srinagar, with an application for directing the SHO to register a case

under Section 156(3) of the Cr. P. C. On 08.08.2018, the Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Srinagar, directed the SHO to register an FIR on the basis of

the allegations made by the complainant against one Parvaiz Ahmad

Sheikh, but instead of registering the FIR, the SHO demanded illegal

gratification from the complainant and her father for doing lawful duty

of lodging the FIR. On the basis of these allegations, the impugned FIR

came to be lodged after conducting the preliminary enquiry.

4)

It has been contended by the petitioner that the complaint lodged

by the complainant, Bisma Nawaz, and her father is false and frivolous.

It is further contended that the preliminary enquiry conducted by the

Anti Corruption Bureau into the allegations made by the complainant

was closed as not proved, even though the said enquiry continued for

about two years. The petitioner has placed on record communication

dated 20.02.2020 to substantiate this fact. It is further contended that

despite closure of preliminary enquiry against the petitioner, the

respondents have registered the impugned FIR which is an afterthought.

3 CRM(M) No.233/2021

It is also contended that the registration of the impugned FIR is ex-facie

an abuse of process of law and that no offence is made out against the

petitioner.

5)

The respondents have resisted the petition by filing a reply thereto.

In the reply, the facts of the case have been reiterated by the respondents.

It has been submitted that the matter was examined by the government

and it was found that the offence under Section 4-A of the J&K

Prevention of Corruption Act is made out against the petitioner.

Accordingly, the impugned FIR came to be registered.

6)

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material on record including the Case Diary.

7)

It appears that during the investigation of the case, the

investigating agency has recorded the statements of the complainant,

Bisma Nawaz, and her father Shahnawaz Ahmad Sofi, besides recording

statements of other witnesses. The complainant, Bisma Nawaz, has

stated that in the year 2017 she was kidnapped by a person, namely,

Parvaiz Ahmad Sheikh, and in this regard she mov