Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Ghulam Mohi Ud Din Bhat & Anr vs Sho Police Station Boniyar Baramulla & ... on 24 May, 2022
Author: Sanjay Dhar
Bench: Sanjay Dhar
ITEM NO.16.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
CRM (M) No. 312/2019
CrlM No. 1088/2019
Ghulam Mohi ud din Bhat & Anr
...Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Sajad Sarwar, Advocate.
VERSUS
SHO Police Station Boniyar Baramulla & Anr.
...Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Illyas Nazir Laway, GA for R-1
Mr. Ateeb Kanth, Advocate for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE
ORDER
24.05.2022 The petitioners through the medium of the instant petition have challenged the FIR No. 40/2019, for offences under sections 499, 500, 506 RPC, registered with police station Boniyar, Baramulla.
It appears that the impugned FIR has been registered on the directions of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class (Sub-Judge) Uri, on the application moved by the respondent No.2-complainant against the petitioner. The direction passed by the learned Magistrate has been issued in exercise of powers vested under section 156 (3) of CrPC. Section 156 of the CrPC, pertains to the investigation into cognizable offence(s) and as per 154 of the CrPC, the officer In-charge of the police station has been vested with the power to register the FIR in respect of the cognizable offence.
The offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioners are non- cognizable in nature. Therefore, the learned Magistrate could not have issued the direction under Section 156 CrPC, asking the police to register the FIR. The order passed by the learned Magistrate is, therefore, not in accordance with the law. The impugned FIR which has been registered in consequence of the said order is liable to be quashed. I am supported in my aforesaid view by the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in "State of Haryana Vs Bhajan Lal" 1992 Supp (1), SCC 335, wherein the Court has held that if contents of the FIR do not disclose commission of a cognizable offence, the same deserves to be quashed by exercising power under Section 482 of the CrPC.
For the foregoing reasons, the instant petition is allowed and the impugned FIR and the proceedings emanating there from are quashed. However, it shall be open to respondent No.2/complainant to take resort to appropriate remedy as may be available to him under law.
The petition is disposed of accordingly.
(Sanjay Dhar) Judge SRINAGAR 24.05.2022 Showkat