Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 801 (JK)

State of J&K v. Farooq Ahmed Ganai

2012-12-27

MANSOOR AHMAD MIR

body2012
1. This review petition is directed against the order dated 29.12.2010 passed by the learned Special Judge (Principal Sessions Judge), Jammu, in File No.19/Special Challan, titled as, State versus Farooq Ahmed Ganai, whereby the respondent came to be discharged of the offences punishable under Section 3 of The Enemy Agents Ordinance, 2005 (1948 A.D.) (for short, Ordinance) and Section 66-F of the Information Technology Act (for short, IT Act). 2. The facts in brief are that FIR No.157/2009 came to be registered against the respondent herein under Section 3 of the Ordinance read with Section 120-B of Ranbir Penal Code and Section 74 of the IT Act in Police Station Nowabad, Jammu on 23.10.2009. Accordingly, investigation was conducted and the challan was presented before the court of Special Judge (Principal Sessions Judge), Jammu. After hearing the arguments, the trial Court came to the conclusion that there was no material evidence on record or sufficient ground which would warrant framing of charges against the respondent herein. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner-State has filed this review petition in terms of Section 9 of the Ordinance. 3. During the pendency of the review petition, the petitioner-State filed an application before this court seeking permission to re-investigate the matter and for collecting other material evidence. The said application came to be dismissed vide order dated 13.03.2012. Petitioner-State did not question the said order and the same has also attained finality. 4. I have gone through the record of the trial court as well as the report of Investigating Agency filed under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. I am of the considered view that the trial court has rightly held that there is nothing on the record which can be made basis for framing charge against the respondent. Even otherwise, there is no sufficient ground which can be made basis for proceeding against the respondent. Accordingly, the impugned order is upheld and the review petition filed by the petitioner-State is dismissed along with all connected CMAs.