GULZAR AHMAD Vs. STATE OF J & K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking direction to respondent Nos. 2 to 4 to produce the wife of the petitioner, namely, Zeenat Begum from the illegal custody and confinement of respondent No. 5 and her custody may be given to the petitioner.

(2.) Status report has been filed by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Rajouri-respondent No. 2 contending therein that in terms of the missing report lodged by the petitioner on 13/11/2013, the police team headed by Bashir Ahmed, ASI was constituted to trace out the respondent No. 6 and ultimately respondent No. 6 was traced from Barnala Tehsil and District Muzzafar Nagar, Police Station Shahpur in Uttar Pradesh and, accordingly the respondent No. 6 was handed over to the petitioner in presence of respectable citizens of Dhani Dhar area where the petitioner has been putting up. It is further contended in the status report that the petitioner had again lodged a written compliant on 5/1/2014 against Mohd. Assan, Mohd. Rahees, both sons of Sh. Riayasat Khan, Mohd. Rakam S/o Sh. Shams Din, Riayasat Khan and Sajad, all residents of Barnala Tehsil and District Muzzafar Nagar, Uttar Pradesh. As such, FIR No.10/2014 under Ss. 366/363/109 RPC was registered against the accused mentioned hereinabove with Police Station Rajouri. Thereafter, the police party recovered the respondent No. 6 and their minor daughter from the possession of the accused persons. Subsequently, the respondent No. 6 was produced before the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rajouri for recording her statement under Sec. 164-A Cr.P.C wherein she deposed that she was not abducted by any person, but her daughter namely Andleep Choudhary was abducted by accused, Mohd. Assan. The Challan in case FIR No. 10/2014 has been produced before the competent Court of law and accused Mohd. Assan is in judicial custody.

(3.) In case Seethalakshmi vs The Commissioner of Police, it has been observed by the Madras High Court on 22/6/2018) in para 22 as under: