WASEEM QURESHI Vs. STATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has preferred this application for initiation of contempt proceedings against respondents for flouting the order dtd. 7/5/2018 passed by this court in CRMC No. 179/18 against the Secretary to Govt. of J&K Law Department, for issuing the circular dtd. 25/11/2020.

(2.) The petitioner has asserted that he had filed a petition under sec. 561-A Cr.PC before this court which was registered as CRMC No. 179/2018, having been aggrieved of the acts of commission at the hands of official respondents as well as Vigilance Organization Kashmir ( now ACB) stating therein that an FIR No. 28/2010 was registered at Police Station VOK against the persons named therein for the commission of offences punishable U/Ss 5 (1) (c ), 5 (1) ( d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, Svt. 2006 read with Sec. 120-B, 409,468 and 471 RPC on 29/7/2010 and that the petitioner had not been named in the FIR. It was further pleaded that Vigilance Organization, however, during the investigation connected the petitioner to the commission of offences. Despite the order passed by this court, the petitioner was called to the anticorruption Court, Srinagar for presentation of challan and thus they are in the contempt of court for having flouted the order passed by this court on 7/5/2018 whereby the prosecution in FIR No. 28/2010 registered at Police Station VOK had been stayed. It was further alleged that the Secretary to Govt. Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs had issued a general Circular bearing No. 07-JK(LD) of 2020 dtd. 25/11/2020 by misinterpreting the order and judgment dtd. 28/3/2018 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India passed in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. and Anr Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, directing all the Administrative Secretaries/HODs to review all administrative actions/procedure held up on account of interim Court orders and in case the orders are more than six months old, treat the orders as expired and proceed accordingly. It was alleged that in view of the circular issued by the Law Department the respondents in contempt of court order passed by this court called the petitioner before the anticorruption court to produce the charge sheet against him. Hence this petition. It was prayed that Rule be framed against the respondents for willful and intentional violation of the order dtd. 7/5/2018.

(3.) Pursuant to notice the respondents filed statement of facts through respondent Nos. 02 and 04 asserting therein that the respondents have highest regards for the court that the prosecution of the case FIR No. 28/2010 registered against the accused including the petitioner had been stayed by this court vide order dtd. 7/5/2018 and the Government had also sanctioned prosecution vide order No. 53-GAD (Vig) of 2017 dtd. 21/8/2017. It has been further pleaded that the law department issued circular No. 07-JK(LD) of 2020 dtd. 25/11/2020 which was endorsed to all the Administrative Secretaries to the Govt. and all HOD's for compliance. In view of that circular answering respondent no. 4 in order to implement the instructions given in the circular and in sincerity and in good faith intimated the accused petitioner through answering respondent no. 2 to be present before the Trial Court for presentation of the charge sheet. However, in the meantime legal guidance was received from Law Officer with the instructions not to file charge sheet before the Trial Court and as a result neither the charge sheet was presented nor the accused petitioner was produced before the court, as such, no contempt as alleged in the contempt petition was committed by the respondents.