Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Bilal Ahmed Sheikh And Another vs Union Territory Of J&K on 6 January, 2020
Author: Sanjeev Kumar
Bench: Sanjeev Kumar
Sr. No. 08
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
AT JAMMU
CRM(M) No. 708/2019
CRLM No. 1677/2019
CRLM No. 1676/2019
Bilal Ahmed Sheikh and another .....Petitioner(s)
Through :- Mr. Vishal Goel, Advocate
V/s
Union Territory of J&K .....Respondent(s)
Through :- Mr. Sudesh Magotra, Dy. AG
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE
ORDER
01. This is a petition jointly filed by the complainant, who lodged the First Information Report and the accused, who was named as offender in the said FIR. The FIR No. 74/2016 has been registered against the petitioner No. 2, for commission of offences under Sections 279, 337 & 338 RPC.
02. It is submitted by the petitioners that they have entered into an amicable settlement and the petitioner No. 1 who was injured in the alleged accident has pardoned the petitioner No. 2, the accused. It is further submitted that the FIR was registered on 24.08.2016 and the presentation of challan and taking of cognizance by the Court is barred by limitation and therefore even, if the challan is presented today, the Court may not be inclined to take a cognizance. In the back drop of aforesaid averments made in the petition, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits it is a fit case where the Court ought to exercise inherent jurisdiction vested in terms of Section 482 of Code of Criminal 2 CRM(M) No. 708/2019 Procedure to quash the FIR and relieve the petitioner No. 2 of agony of appearing before the police every now and then.
03. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record, I am of the view that, in the given facts and circumstances, it is a fit case for exercising inherent jurisdiction of this Court and to quash FIR No. 74/2016 registered against the petitioner No. 2.
04. Admittedly, the offence under Section 279 RPC, is compoundable whereas offences under Sections 337 & 338 RPC are compoundable with the permission of the court. The FIR was registered as far as back on 24.08.2016 and the police has not been able to present the challan, even after lapse of more than 3 years. Since, the offence under Section 338 RPC, is punishable for a maximum imprisonment of two years and therefore the taking of cognizance of the offences alleged against the petitioner No. 2 is admittedly barred by limitation.
05. Without dilating much on the issue and taking into consideration the fact that the offences are not very serious and that the parties have amicably resolved their dispute, this Court is inclined to the quash FIR No. 74/2016.
06. Ordered, accordingly.
(Sanjeev Kumar) Judge JAMMU 06.01.2020 Shammi Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No SHAMMI KUMAR 2020.01.07 11:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document