Dismissed

Abdul Rashid Bhat v. State through SHO Police Station Lalpora, Kupwara

J&K HC8 Jul 2021CRMC/10/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Bench dismissed a petition under Section 561-A CrPC challenging the registration of three FIRs. The court held that police investigation revealed sufficient evidence connecting petitioners to offences, and no abuse of process was demonstrated.

What did the court decide?

Petition under Section 561-A CrPC dismissed as it is found to be without any merit.

Abdul Rashid Bhat Vs State through SHO Police… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | J&K HC (2021)

¶1

P a g e | 1

¶2

Item No.209 Single Bench After Notice List IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR

¶3

CRMC No.10/2018

¶4

IA No.1/2018

¶5

ABDUL RASHID BHAT AND OTHERS

¶6

.…Petitioner/Appellant(s)

¶7

Through: None

¶8

¶9

STATE THROUGH SHO POLICE STATION LALPORA KUPWARA

¶10

…Respondent(s)

¶11

Through: Mr. Bikram Singh, GA vice Mr. Sajjad Ashraf, GA

¶12

CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar, Judge.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

08.07.2021

¶15

For the last two consecutive dates of hearing there is no representation on behalf of petitioners. Today also when matter is called out, nobody turned up to represent the petitioners.

¶16

This is a petition, filed in terms of Section 561-A Cr.PC of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Petitioners have called in question FIR nos.28/2016, 51/2016 and FIR No.52/2016 registered against them in Police Station Lalpora.

¶17

The impugned FIRs have been assailed on the ground that there is dispute between petitioners and their neighbours, who are none other than the petitioner no.2’s cousins. The petitioners’ claim is that they approached Revenue Department for restoring their rights to ingress and egress to their property. It is submitted that the well-wishers of the petitioners and their cousins had intervened in the matter and tried to solve the dispute amicably but the complainant party was not interested

¶18

SHAMEEM HAMID MIR 2021.07.12 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

P a g e | 2

¶20

to settle the dispute. They, are therefore, using every tactics up their sleeve to deprive the petitioners of their right of ingress and egress to their house.

¶21

Civil Court has also taken cognizance of the matter and suit for permanent injunction filed in the Court of Principal District Judge, Kupwara is sub-judice.

¶22

The grievance of the petitioners is that complainant party with a view to settle a civil dispute has been lodging FIR after FIR only to harass the petitioners.

¶23

Respondents have filed status report in which it is stated that on 17^th April, 2016, one Ghulam Qadir Bhat S/o Mohammed Sadiq R/o Lalpora approached Police Station Lalpora with a written application stating therein that Abdul Rashid Bhat along-with his associates entered his residential house armed with lathies and axes and molested women folk, damaged property and stole cash of Rupees one lac.

¶24

On receipt of the said information, case FIR No 28/2016 under Sections 149, 323, 354, 379, 427, 506 RPC was registered in Police Station Lalpora. The investigation was set into motion and Investigating Officer visited the place of occurrence, recorded statement of witnesses and found offences under Sections 149, 323, 354, 379, 427, 506 RPC established against the accused persons i.e. petitioners herein.

¶25

On 15-06-2016, another application was received from Ghulam Qadir Bhat with regard to assault made by the petitioners. In written application submitted, Mr. Ghulam Qadir Bhat made allegations against the petitioners that they forcibly entered his residence and tried to outrage modesty of the women folk. In this regard, case FIR No 51/2016, was registered in the P/s Lalpora. The legal formalities were

¶26

SHAMEEM HAMID MIR 2021.07.12 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶27

P a g e | 3

¶28

completed and statements of the witnesses were recorded and prima facie offences under Section 147, 354, 427 RPC were found to be made out against the petitioners.

¶29

On 15-06-2016, one Mohammad Yousuf Bhat S/o Haji Ali Mohammed Bhat R/o Lalpora also filed complaint against the petitioners alleging therein that Tehsildar Lalpora was in their mohalla for demarcation when the petitioners’ party assaulted him and his family, resulting in injuries to the family members of complainant Mohammad Yousuf Bhat.

¶30

On receipt of said information in writing, case FIR No 52/2016 was registered in Police Station Lalpora. It is claimed that the investigation in this FIR has been completed and prima facie case under Sections 147, 447, 354, 323 RPC have been found established against the petitioners.

¶31

It is submitted by the respondents that there is a dispute between Ghulam Qadir Bhat and others on one side and Ghulam Rasool Lone on the other-side over link road and it is because of this reason that the petitioners have assaulted the complainant party.

¶32

It is submitted that all the three cases registered in Police Stations have been thoroughly investigated and charge-sheets have been presented in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class Sogam and the trial is going on since 27^th March, 2018.

¶33

Having heard learned counsel for the respondents and perused the record, I am of the view that petitioners have not been able to demonstrate that the registration of impugned FIRs is an abuse of process of law. It is a matter of fact that police upon registration of FIRs has investigated the matter and has found enough evidence which

¶34

SHAMEEM HAMID MIR 2021.07.12 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶35

P a g e | 4

¶36

connects the accused-petitioners with the commission of offences alleged in the impugned FIRs. Not only the police has visited the scene of occurrence but it has also recorded the statement of witnesses and has, prima facie , found the offences alleged to be made out against the petitioners.

¶37

The challans are now presented before the competent Court of law. If that be the position, it shall be open for the petitioners to appear before the trial Court and contest the charges on merits. The trial in all the three cases are going on since 27^th March, 2018 and by now these trials be nearing their completion.

¶38

Be that as it may, no case is made out to interfere with the impugned FIRs or the investigation made by the respondents.

¶39

This petition is found to be without any merit and same is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶40

(Sanjeev Kumar) Judge

¶41

SRINAGAR 08.07.2021

¶42

Shameem H.

¶43

SHAMEEM HAMID MIR 2021.07.12 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Abdul Rashid Bhat v. State through SHO Police Station Lalpora, Kupwara

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Rashid Bhat v. State through SHO Police Station Lalpora, Kupwara

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdul Majeed Bhat Vs Union Territory through Director General of Police and Ors. (Home Department)

Farooq Ahmad Lone Vs J and K Grameen Bank

Javid Ahmad Lone Vs Abida Mushtak and Anr.

Union Territory of J and K through Principal Secretary, Home Department and Ors. Vs Jehangir Ahmad Ganie Alias Jana Logi through His Cousin Nazir Ahmad Mir

Nazir Ahmad Mir and Anr. Vs State of J Nd K and Ors. (Home Department)

State through Police Station Qazigund Vs Reyaz Ahmad Wani and Anr.