SHABNAM ARA Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been moved for quashing FIR No. 169/97 under Section 363 R.P.C Registered on 2.7.97 at Police Station Shopian and proceedings taken thereto on the ground that the petitioner Shabnam Ara is a student of B.SC and Riyaz Ahmad Sofi Ex. student of B.E. Engineering, were married to each other. Both were major and consented to the marriage. The marriage is evidenced by the Nikahnema, registration of marriage agreement by Sub Registrar, Kulgam and affidavit executed before the Registration of the marriages ( Annexure B to E ). The relations of the petitioner did not take all this in right spirit and in fact were annoyed and are hostile to her and Riaz Ahmad Sofi. Her in law are respectable people. They are being harassed. The maternal uncle and other relations of the petitioner lodged FIR 169/ 97 under section 363 at police station, Shopian alleging falsely her kidnapping by her husband and his relations. The petitioner has also filed civil suit in the court of Munsiff Chadoora for declaration and injunction and obtained an injunction order in that case. The FIR is sought to be quashed on the ground that petitioner is reported to be a major on the date of alleged occurrence, who has of her own married the said Riaz Ahmad and the question of kidnapping does not arise.

(2.) DESPITE repeated opportunities to petitioner from October 13,1997, the petitioner has not appeared. Even, the counsel for respondents has not appeared today. The record has been perused and matter considered. Admittedly case has been registered by Police station Shopian as FIR No. 169/97 on 2 -9 -1997 under section 363 R.P.C. The case as per available record is under investigation. The question of petitioner being major on the day of occurrence and her alleged marriage interalia as per Annexure -A, with Riaz Ahmad as evidenced by Annexure -B to Annexure -E, are matters for the investigating agency to be taken note of and to consider and determine their impact on the question. Similarly, her filing of the suit in the court of Munsiff Chadoora ( Annexure -F ) and the orders if any passed in that suit shall have also to be reckoned with by the investigating officer. No definite opinion can be framed by the court on all these papers which are photostat copies. At this stage the genuineness or otherwise of the documents is a matter again for the investigative agency and the concerned court(s). It was perhaps in this context that a bench of this court on 10 -7 -1997, while admitting petitioner to bail, directed her to appear before the police station at Shopian and to cooperate with the investigating agency and the concerned investigating officer who was directed to take into consideration the effect of the documents in possession -of the petitioner once filed before the Investigating officer and contextually the proceedings were observed as premature in the sense that the FIR has been registered and is under the investigation".

(3.) IT is settled law that investigations undertaken by the police on information disclosing cognizable offence cannot be quashed under Section 561 -A Cr.P.C, after all police under sections 154 and 156 Cr.P.C have statutory right to investigate a cognizable offence. It is not the practice of the High Court to go into the disputed questions of fact under this section. Besides, the matter in this case is the subject of contest between the parties in civil court and the matter is at initial stage. The High Court in the totality of facts and circumstances of this case, is not to interfere, much -less to quash on - going investigations at police station Shopian.