LAWS(J&K)-1998-3-38

MOHD SADIQ KANT Vs. STATE OF J&K

Decided On March 12, 1998
Mohd Sadiq Kant Appellant
V/S
STATE OF JANDK Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON the application of Hafiz Ullah Shah Respondent No.2, S. H. O. Police Station Karan nagar on investigation/inquiry into the matter, filed a case against the two petitioners Mohd Sadiq Kanth and Ghulam Din Shah, before the Tehsildar, Executive Magistrate, Srinagar under Section 107 Cr. P. C. requesting the Magistrate to bind the two for keeping peace in order to prevent disturbance of public tranquility and public peace.

(2.) THE Magistrate after taking cognisance of complaint on 17 -2 -1998, issued notice under Section 112 Cr. P. C to the two petitioners to show cause why each one of them -should not be ordered to execute a bond in sum of Rs. 5000/ - with one surety.

(3.) THE respondents have challenged not only the order of the Magistrate requiring them to show cause as to why they should not be bound under section 107 Cr. P. C. but have prayed for quashment of the proceedings under section 561 A Cr. P. C. The parties are alleged to be intimately related. Mohd Sadiq Kanth is brother in law of hafeez -ullahShah. Wife of Mohd Sadiq Kanth, Hafizuliah and Ghulam Din Shah are locked in a civil dispute, regarding part ancestral property gifted to said Hafeez Uliah Shahs sister by her father. The proceedings under section 107 Cr. P. C. have been prompted by this litigation The complainant Hafizullah Shah being an influential business man managed to launch proceedings under Section 107 Cr. P. C against him on false allegations that on 26 -1 -1998 non -applicants appeared at the shop of the applicant and abused and threatened him, putting the public peace at jeopardy. In fact on 26 -1 -88 the non -applicant Mohd Sadiq Kanth, Accounts Officer with Directorate of Store Procurement Department Pampore Srinagar, was actually at Bombay in connection with reconciliation of accounts with the Steel Authority of India. The letters, railway ticket, receipts and other documents are testimony to his being at Bombay on 26 -1 -88, the date of alleged occurrence, Photostat copies of these documents are on record.