Advocates:
['SALIH PIRZADA', 'SHARAF WANI', 'ASIFA PADROO', 'AAG']

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT SRINAGAR

Reserved on: 05.08.2022

Pronounced on:17.08.2022

CRMC No.195/2018

ABDUL QAYOOM DAR

... PETITIONER(S)

Through: -

Mr. Salih Pirzada, Advocate, with

Ms. Sharaf Wani, Advocate.

Vs.

STATE OF J&K

…RESPONDENT(S)

Through: -

Ms. Asifa Padroo, AAG.

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE

JUDGMENT

1)

The petitioner has challenged proceedings arising out of FIR

No.28/209 for offences under Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2)

of the J&K Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 161 of RPC

registered with Police Station, Vigilance Organization, Kashmir, that

are pending before the Court of Special Judge, Anticorruption,

Kashmir, Srinagar.

2)

It appears that on 06.10.2009, a complaint was lodged by one

Shri Wahid Jeelani Dar before Vigilance Organization, Kashmir,

stating therein that he had approached the petitioner, who was posted

as Patwari Halqa Kralpora at the relevant time, for obtaining a report

2

regarding the land to be mortgaged to J&K Bank Branch Nowgam

for the purpose of raising loan. It was further alleged in the

complaint that the petitioner demanded a bribe of Rs.2000/ for

furnishing the requisite report but the same was negotiated at an

amount of Rs.1000/. On the basis of this complaint, the aforesaid

FIR came to be registered and a trap was laid against the petitioner

herein. During the trap proceedings, the petitioner was found to have

demanded and accepted a bribe of Rs.1000/ from the complainant

and after investigation of the case, offences under Section 5(1)(d)

r/w Section 5(2) of the J&K Prevention of Corruption Act and

Section 161 of RPC were found established against the petitioner.

After obtaining the requisite sanction for launching prosecution

against the petitioner from the competent authority, the challan was

laid before the trial court on 12.03.2010. It further appears that after

the trial of the case was completed and the defence evidence was

over, the petitioner approached this Court through the medium of

instant petition challenging the proceedings.

3)

It is contended in the petition that investigation in the FIR has

been conducted by a non-designate officer as according to Section 3

of the J&K Prevention of Corruption Act, no police officer below the

rank of Dy. SP can investigate the offence under Section 5 of the

said Act without the order of a Magistrate, whereas in the instant

case, the investigation has been conducted by an officer of the rank

of Inspector. On this ground it is urged that the whole investigation

3

is void. It has been further contended that the petitioner belongs to

lowest tier of Government service and he has been put to adversities

as a result of meritless prosecution.

4)

In its response, the investigating agency has reiterated the

contents of the charge sheet and it has been submitted that the main

case is pending for final arguments before the trial Court.

5)

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record of the case including the trial court record.

6)

So far as the contention of the petitioner that investigation of

the case has been conducted by a non-designate police officer is

concerned, in this regard it has to be noted that an entrustment order

has been issued by Senior Superintendent of Police, Vigilance

Organization, Kashmir, vide his No.SSP/VOK-FIR-2919 dated

06.10.2009, whereby investigation of the FIR in question has been

entrusted to Inspector B. A. Mir and he has been authorized under

Section 3 of the J&K PC Act to arrest the accused whenever and

wherever necessary. The entrustment order further provides that the

said Inspector will conduct the investigation under the supervision of

the Senior Superintendent of Police (SLK).

7)

. In terms of second proviso to Section 3 of the J&K PC Act,

Senior Superintendent of Police is vested with the power