MADHUBALA TANDON Vs. STATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner in the instant petition has challenged the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge Poonch on 06.10.2012 whereby the petitioner has been charge sheeted for the commission of offences under Section 420/471/467/468 of RPC on the grounds detailed out in the petition with particular reference that the order impugned amounts to non-application of mind as the petitioner had not committed any offence and case was registered on the basis of enmity. Learned counsel for the petitioner had been asked as to whether the material forming basis for investigation of the case qua statements recorded by the Police and also on the strength of the documentary evidence, this Court can evaluate the evidence in depth for the purpose of quashing the order of learned Sessions Judge in terms whereof the petitioner has been charge sheeted for the offences mentioned above, but he could not convince the Court with any answer.

(2.) At the outset and without going to the merits of the case, what requires to be stated herein this case is that the Apex Court has held that power is to be exercised cautiously, carefully and sparingly and Court has not to function as a Court of appeal or revision. It has also laid down the parameters and guidelines in cases titled as 'K.L.E Society and Ors. V. Siddalingesh' reported in '2008 AIR SCW 1993'; 'A.P Vs Bojjoori Kanthaiah' reported as '2008 AIR SCW 7860' and 'Reshma Bano Vs State of Uttar Pradesh' reported in '2008 AIR SCW 1998'.

(3.) It is also well settled that the High Courts should not interfere with the investigation which would amount to stalling the investigation and jurisdiction of statutory authorities to exercise powers in accordance with the provisions of criminal Code. The Apex Court in cases reported as AIR 2004 SC 3967, AIR 1972 SC 484, AIR 1974 SC 1446, AIR 1977 SC 2229, AIR 1989 SC 01, has laid down the same principle. It is apt to reproduce para 10, 13, 14, 15, 17 and 19 out of the judgment titled as Som Mittal Vs Govt. of Karnataka reported in 2008 AIR SCW 1003 herein: