S. No.55

Supplementary List

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT SRINAGAR

CRM(M) No.241/2022

CrlM No.746/2022

Aadil Rashid Wani

…..Petitioner(s)

Through: Mr. Junaid Rashid, Advocate

V/s

Union Territory of J&K and Ors.

….. Respondent(s)

Through: None

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE

ORDER

01.07.2022

1. The petitioner has challenged FIR No.91/2022 registered with Police

Station Qazigund for commission of offences under Section 420, 380

IPC.

2. As per the impugned FIR, one Bashir Ahmad Itoo lodged a complaint

with SHO, Police Station Qazigund, alleging therein that on 17.05.2022

he had gone to withdraw money from ATM at Qazigund and when he

operated the ATM by inserting his ATM Card in the ATM machine he

could not withdraw any money. It was further averred that at the

relevant time there were four to five more persons inside the ATM

counter. On 31.5.2022, when the complainant again went to the ATM

for withdrawing money, he checked his account balance and found that

there was credit balance of Rs.19,000/- only in his account, whereafter

he went to J&K Bank Branch Wanpoh to enquire about the matter, as

there were about more than seven lac rupees lying in his account. He

was told by the officers of the Bank that withdrawal has been made

SARVEEDA NISSAR

2022.07.05 17:03

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

2

through the ATM Card, though the complainant had not made any such

withdrawal. It was alleged by the complainant that on 17.05.2022 when

he had gone to the ATM, some unknown person had taken away his

ATM Card and withdrawn the amount of about Rupees seven lacs from

his account. On the basis of this complaint the impugned FIR came to

be registered.

3. The petitioner has challenged the impugned FIR on the ground that

under the garb of investigation of the said FIR he is being harassed by

the police, merely because he has withdrawn an amount of Rs.3000/-

from the same ATM on the said date. It has been further contended that

there has been delay in lodging the report by the complainant and he

has cooked up a concocted story. It is also contended that even as per

the CCTV footage identity of the person who has withdrawn money

from the ATM in question could not be ascertained, as such, the

petitioner cannot be roped in the impugned FIR.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material

on record.

5. As per the material placed on record by the petitioner alongwith

petition, it appears that the complainant has alleged that at the time

when he operated his ATM Card, the same was swapped by some

unknown person inside the ATM, whereafter some unknown person

withdrew an amount of about rupees seven lacs from his account. It

further appears that the petitioner had approached the Court of Principal

Sessions Judge Kulgam for grant of bail in anticipation of his arrest but

the same has been dismissed by the Court in terms of order dated

17.06.2022. Copy of the report of the prosecution submitted before the

SARVEEDA NISSAR

2022.07.05 17:03

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

3

Principal Sessions Judge Kulgam has also been placed on record. As

per the said report during the investigation of the case and after

examining the CCTV footage of the relevant time, a strong suspicion

about the involvement of the petitioner has come to fore.

6. The contents of the impugned FIR disclose commission of cognizable

offence. Though the name of the culprit is not mentioned in the

impugned FIR, yet the investigation in this regard is in progress. The

report submitted by the prosecution before the Sessions Judge Kulgam

indicates that there are strong reasons to believe that the petitioner is

involved in the alleged c