HAFEEZA BEGUM & ORS. Vs. ALI MOHAMMAD SHEIKH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Ali Mohammad Sheikh S/O Mohammad Sultan Sheikh R/O Dardpora, Kralpora, Tehsil and District Kupwara filed a complaint before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Kupwara, on 23.11.2010, which was diarized. After noticing the allegations contained in the complaint, a preliminary statement of the complainant was recorded along with one witness. The trial court, vide order dated 23.11.2010, has taken cognizance and issued the process against the accused for the commission of offences under Sections 420,471 and 468 RFC.

(2.) The present petition under Section 561-A Cr. P. C. has been filed by the accused seeking to quash the proceedings before the trial court. The ground taken is that the complaint has been on the dockets of the Court for nearly about two years and that the accused has appeared before the trial Court, but the same is not disposed of by the trial court. Pendency of the criminal complaint, or the time taken in deciding the same, cannot by any stretch of imagination be factors, muchless legal, for seeking quashment of the proceedings.

(3.) It is also submitted at the Bar that, going by the contents of the complaint, at best, a dispute of civil nature may be made out, but, in no case, the offences alleged against the accused-petitioner are, prime facie, made out which would warrant taking of cognizance or issuance of process against the petitioners. Perusal of the allegations made in the complaint belies the aforesaid statement and stand taken by the learned counsel for the petitioners. On the contrary, I am convinced that there are such allegations made in the complaint as were sufficient to move the trial court into taking the cognizance and issuing process against the accused. The trial court, after noticing the said allegations made in the complaint, recorded the preliminary statement of the complainant and one of his witnesses. It is only thereafter that the trial court has assumed a prima facie satisfaction as to the commission of the offences and proceeded to take cognizance and issued the process in terms of the provisions of law. The course adopted by the trial court cannot by any standards be said to be an abuse of the process of Court.