Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Cm (4665/2021) vs Ut Of J&K And Others on 3 August, 2021
Supplementary 1 Causelist
S. No. 351
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP (C) 1366/2021
CM (4665/2021)
Iftikhar Rasheed
... Petitioner/Appellant(s)
Through: Mr. Hussain Rashid, Advocate
V/s
UT of J&K and others
... Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Hakeem Aman Ali, DAG
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE
ORDER
03-8-2021
1. The petitioner in the instant petition while invoking the extraordinary
writ jurisdiction of this court implores for the following reliefs:
" . . . Respondents 6, 7 and 8 may be directed, not to
harass and not to intervene into the peaceful life of
petitioner and further respondent no 1 to 5 be directed to
provide necessary protection to petitioner. And direction
be issued to the Government of UT of J&K to establish
police complaint authority in light of the supreme court
judgment Prakash Singh Vs Union of India 2006(8) SCC
1."
2. The petition is being filed on the premise that the petitioner is a
journalist by profession with good reputation and respect in the area
and that on account of some transactions with few persons including
Ghulam Mohammad, SPO, Haroon Rashid, SPO and Mohammad
Iqbal Wani, owner of a jewellery shop. It is submitted that at the
instance of the said persons, the police officials started searching the
house of the petitioner and calling him to the police station on and off
and directing him to make payment towards the persons named above.
WP (C) 1366/2021 Page |2
3. It is being stated that the official respondents being law enforcing
agencies are in law bound to uphold the majesty of the law and to
extend protection to the citizens as guaranteed under the constitution.
It is alleged that the official respondents, however, are misusing their
official position under the influence of the persons that the petitioner
has some transactions with, and are thus in the process extending
serious threats to the petitioner leaving no option for the petitioner
except to seek indulgence of this court.
4. At the very outset, it is noticed upon perusal of the petition that the
persons mentioned in the petition have not been impleaded as party
respondents. Only police officials have been impleaded as party
respondents.
5. Be that as it may, the respondents in their objections while
controverting and resisting the petition of the petitioner, have stated
that the petitioner has not approached this court with clean hands and
has in fact tried to mislead the court by misrepresentation of the facts.
It is being contended in the objections that the respondents being
public functionaries have never misused their authority against the
law. It is being next contended that the respondent No. 2 upon receipt
of two complaints on 29.6.2021 from one Ghulam Nabi Najar, belt
No. 197/SPO and Abdul Rashid Dar, SPO belt No. 150, wherein it
had been alleged that the petitioner had taken an amount of Rs. 1 lakh
from each of them promising them job in the police department and
that the petitioner did not provide them the job and thus deceived
them and fraudulently grabbed their money. It is being next contended
in the objections that upon receipt of the complaints, the same came to
be forwarded to Dy. S.P. headquarters Baramulla, wherein a
preliminary inquiry was initiated.
6. It is being contended in the objections that the veracity or otherwise of
the complaint could not be inquired into on account of non-
availability of the officer concerned and that in the meantime on
8.7.2021 one Mohammad Iqbal Wani son of Abdul Aziz Wani
resident of Sultanpora, Pattan, filed a complaint before the respondent
No. 2 alleging therein that the petitioner had taken gold ornaments
worth Rs. 10.5 lakh on credit from his jewelery shop and he has not
WP (C) 1366/2021 Page |3
made any payment thereof and that on demand the petitioner is
threatening the complainant. The said complaint is said to have been
forwarded to SHO police station Pattan for taking action under rules
wherein a preliminary inquiry is being initiated. It is being contended
in the objections that the petitioner has fraudulently swindled lakhs of
rupees from general public and that the complaints are being inquired
into.
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
8. While making his statements in line with the contentions raised in the
petition, the counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the inquiries
initiated by the official respondents have resulted into registration of
an FIR being FIR no. 169/2021 dated 29.7.2021 under section 420
IPC P/S Baramulla. A copy of the FIR is produced before the court.
9. Having regard to the nature of the controversy involved in the petition
and the reliefs prayed for, inasmuch as FIR having been registered in
the matter, there is no reason for this court to retain this petition for
further proceedings. The petition is accordingly taken up for final
disposal and is disposed of with the following direction:-
The Investigating Officer in FIR No. 169/2021 dated 29.7.2021
may proceed ahead with the investigation of the case in
accordance with law and in the process, however, shall refrain
from harassing the petitioner. Needless to mention that the
petitioner would cooperate with the investigation.
10.Disposed of.
(JAVED IQBAL WANI)
JUDGE
Srinagar
03-08-2021
N Ahmad
NISSAR A BHAT
2021.08.05 18:20
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
