Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1019 (JK)

Mohd. Arif v. State of J&K

2018-12-24

SANJAY KUMAR GUPTA

body2018
JUDGMENT : MCC NO.408/2018 For the reasons stated in the application, it is allowed and the requirement of filing of copies of the writ petition along with the annexures upon the private respondents is dispensed with. Application disposed of. OWP No. 2632/2018, IA No. 01/2018 1. Through the medium of this petition, petitioner seeks a direction to the official respondents for re-investigation in the case titled "State V/s Mohd. Sagar & Ors." (FIR No.41/2018 of P/S Nagrota, Jammu) wherein challan has been presented under sections 341/323/34 RPC, pending disposal before the Court of Learned Munsiff, Jammu because of shoddy, incomplete and unreasoned investigation conducted in a perfunctory manner. 2. The case of the petitioner is that on 18th February, 2018 at about 7.30 in the evening, the father of the petitioner, namely, Mohd. Mushtaq Ali went to the market for bringing the milk and while coming back from the market, the respondent no.5 to 15 started verbally abusing the father of the petitioner and when the father of the petitioner along with his brother, namely, Shokat Ali has stopped the respondents no. 5 to15 for doing such an illegal act then the said respondents with criminal intention and on the basis of enmity have wrongfully restrained the father of the petitioner along with his brother and thereafter started beating the father of the petitioner along with his brother with iron rods and with fists and blows. Thereafter matter was reported to the respondent no. 4-SHO Police Station, Nagrota, Jammu with a request to register an FIR against the respondent no. Thereafter matter was reported to the respondent no. 4-SHO Police Station, Nagrota, Jammu with a request to register an FIR against the respondent no. 5 to 15, but he did not accede to the request of the father of the petitioner as well as his brother and in the absence of the father of the petitioner as well as his brother, the accused persons who were on the same spot, by taking the benefit of the said situation, caught hold the petitioner and started beating the petitioner mercilessly as a result of which the petitioner has sustained serious injuries on his head and thereafter the father of the petitioner along with his brother have saved the life of the petitioner from the clutches of the accused persons and if the father of the petitioner along with his brother would not have reached the spot where the accused persons have hold the petitioner and started beating him mercilessly then definitely the accused persons would have killed the petitioner and it is because of the efforts of the father of the petitioner along with his brother, the petitioner was able to save his life from the clutches of the accused persons and the petitioner was shifted to Govt., Medical College Hospital, Jammu for further treatment. 3. It is contended that again on 19th February, 2018 a request was made to respondent No. 4 to register an FIR against the above said accused persons who also have attacked the father of the petitioner as well as his brother Shokat Ali, but the respondent no. 4 was reluctant to take any action against the accused persons despite of the fact that the said accused persons have made an attempt to murder the petitioner and after repeated requests, the respondent no. 4 has registered the FIR but in order to give benefit to the accused persons, the respondent no. 4 has not booked the accused persons under relevant provisions of law and has registered the case against the accused persons just to give benefit to the accused persons and more over gone to such an extent that the respondent no. 4 has registered the FIR but in order to give benefit to the accused persons, the respondent no. 4 has not booked the accused persons under relevant provisions of law and has registered the case against the accused persons just to give benefit to the accused persons and more over gone to such an extent that the respondent no. 4 has taken the signatures of the petitioner as well as the other family members of the petitioner on the blank papers and their statements have not been recorded in their presence and has not placed on record the medical reports as well as the submissions made by the father of the petitioner as well as his brother. It is stated that the Challan in the aforesaid FIR No. 41/2018 has been produced before the Court of Learned Munsiff, Jammu only under Sections 341/323/34 R.P.C. and only against the respondents no.5 to 8 and left over the serious offences and rest of the accused persons i.e. respondent nos. 9 to 15. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent contended that official respondent No. 4 was in hand in glove with the private respondents whose names were there in the complaint, and while preparing the challan he has deleted the offences which were serious in nature. It is further contended that the criminal case under FIR No. 41/2018 whose challan has been presented in the Court of Learned Munsiff Jammu requires reinvestigation as the medical record which has been annexed with the petition has not been considered by the Investigating Officer during the investigation. 5. During the course of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would feel satisfied, if the Magistrate where the challan is pending is directed to consider the plea of the petitioner for reinvestigation of the matter in terms of Section 173 Cr.P.C. after relying upon the medical report which the petitioner has annexed with the instant petition. 6. Mr. C.M. Koul, learned Sr. AAG appearing for the official respondents states that he has no objections, in case, submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is allowed. 7. 6. Mr. C.M. Koul, learned Sr. AAG appearing for the official respondents states that he has no objections, in case, submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is allowed. 7. In view of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner the instant writ petition is disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to file a detailed application alongwith all the annexures which have been annexed with this petition before the trial Court for further investigation. If such, application is filed, same shall be considered the trial court after relying upon the documents and other pleas in terms of Section 173 clause 8 Cr.P.C. 8. With the aforementioned observation, the writ petition is disposed of along with connected IA.