AJEET CHOPRA Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the instant petition, the petitioner has challenged order No. SPSJ/ Rdr/20/9332-36 dtd. 3/8/2020 issued by the Superintendent of Police, City South, Jammu/respondent No.3 whereby the said respondent has, inspite of the investigation in the case FIR No. 03/2020 for offences under Sec. 380 IPC registered with Police Station, Satwari having been closed as not admitted by the orders of Senior Superintendent of Police, Jammu/respondent No.2, directed further investigation of the case.

(2.) It is case of the petitioner that the aforesaid FIR came to be registered against the petitioner and investigation into the same was set into motion. After investigation of the case, the investigating officer arrived at a conclusion that allegations against the petitioner are not substantiated and as such, a report in this regard was submitted by the investigating officer to respondent No. 5/Dy. Superintendent of Police, SDPO, City South, Jammu, who in turn, vide his report dtd. 2/7/2020 submitted the matter to respondent No.2/Senior Superintendent of Police, Jammu. It is the further case of the petitioner that respondent No.2/SSP, Jammu accepted the recommendation of the respondent No. 5 and vide his order dtd. 6/7/2020 accorded approval to the conclusion of the investigation of the case as not admitted. It has been contended that respondent No.3 surprisingly, after accord of the approval to closure of the case by respondent No.2 vide his order dtd.. 6/7/2020 issued the impugned order observing that the investigation of the case has not been carried out in professional manner and thereafter transferred the investigation to incharge of Police Post, Chatha.

(3.) The main and only contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that once a superior officer of Police has approved the closure of a case as not admitted, it is not open to an officer who is inferior in rank to flout the aforesaid order and direct reinvestigation of the case.