MUFTI SHAMS UD DIN Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners (i) Mufti Shams-ud-din S/O Sh. Abdul Gani Sheikh R/O Mahaore District Reasi, (ii) Ghulam Qadir S/O Sh. Abdul Gani Sheikh R/O Sarhbagga Tehsil Mahaore District Reasi, (iii) Shabir Ahmed S/O Ghulam Qadir R/O Sarhbagga Tehsil Mahaore District Reasi, (iv) Mohd Iqbal S/O Mohd Ramzan R/O Mahaore District Reasi, (v) Manzoor Ahmed S/O Abdul Rashid R/O Bathoi Tehsil Mahore District Reasi, (vi) Mohd Bashir S/O Abdul Gaffar R/O Mahaore District Reasi and (vii) Mohd Abass S/O Bashir Ahmed R/O Mahaore District Reasi, have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court in terms of Sec. 561-A of Code of Criminal Procedure (now Sec. 482 Cr.pc) seeking quashment of FIR No. 45/2018 dtd. 29/6/2018 registered at Police Station Mahore for commission of offences punishable under Ss. 379, 147, 506, 295-A, 323 RPC on the following grounds:-

(2.) Respondent No.1 in it's status report has contended, that on 29/6/2018 complainant namely Abdul Saman, (respondent No.2 herein) produced an application duly marked by the Ld. Munsiff JMIC Reasi in Police Station Mahore for lodging of FIR against the accused persons including the petitioners wherein it was alleged, that on 8/6/2018 during the meeting of Managing Committee of Bilal Masjid, he raised some queries from the members of said committee regarding the construction work of Bilal Masjid as well as transactions/details of account made during the period of said committee, instead of the reply to the said query, members of committee including the petitioners misbehaved with him as well as beat him mercilessly, on this complaint FIR No. 45/2018 u/ss 379, 147, 506, 295-A, 323 RPC was registered at Police Station Mahore and investigation conducted by SI Mohd Shafi. It is contended, that during investigation, I.O visited the spot and prepared the site plan, got recorded the statements of complainant and Abdullah S/O Jamal Din R/o Aadbis Tehsil Mahore under Sec. 164-A CrPC before the court of law, obtained the certified copies of statements, accused persons/petitioners produced an order dtd. 7/7/2018 passed by this Court whereby the petitioners were bailed out with direction to cooperate with the I.O and further the Hon'ble Court has stayed the investigation, that in compliance to the directions dtd. 3/2/2022 answering respondent again started the investigation and during investigation, I.O recorded the statements of witnesses u/s 161 CrPC and it came to fore that on 8/6/2018, complainant namely, Ab Suban S/o Ab Aziz caste Shan R/o Jamslan at present Mahore, Reasi has gone to Bilal Masjid Sharief Mahore for offering prayer and at 3-4 pm when the complainant came out from the said Masjid and while going to Mahore Market the complainant was asked by Shamas-ud-Din about the details as well as accounts of Masjid Sharief and on this (i) Shamas-ud-Din, (ii) Ghulam Qadir sons of Ab Gani, (iii) Shabir Ahmed S/o Ghulam Qadir caste Sheikh R/o Sadh Bagha Tehsil Mahore, District Reasi started to beat the complainant with fists and blows. It is moreso contended, that on hearing hue and cry some persons came on spot and accused persons mentioned above fled away from the spot, during the course of investigation offence u/ss 295-A, 379, 147 RPC were deleted and Ss. 341, 323, 506, 34 RPC proved and added against the aforesaid accused persons only and not against the other accused persons namely, (i) Manzoor Ahmed S/o Ab Rashid R/o Bathoi, (ii) Mohd Iqbal S/o Mohd Ramzan, (iii) Mohd Bashir S/o Ab Gaffar,

(3.) Mr. Rahul Pant, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, while recapitulating the grounds urged in the petition, has sought the quashment of impugned FIR by vehemently canvassing arguments, that the allegations leveled against the petitioners are totally baseless and malicious. It is argued, that the allegations made in the FIR even if are taken on their face value and accepted in its entirety do not prima facie constitute any cognizable offence much less any offence against the petitioners, despite such facts, the petitioners are being harassed by respondent No.2 by lodging the impugned FIR which is abuse of process of law only to wreck vengeance against the petitioners and to victimize them.