Mohd. Iqbal vs Union Territory Of J&K And Another
2021 Latest Caselaw 1507 j&K

                                                               Sr. No. 69




 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                  AT JAMMU

                                           CRM(M) No. 415/2020 (O&M)

Mohd. Iqbal                                     .....Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)


                      Through: Mr. Sachin Gupta, Advocate
                 Vs


Union Territory of J&K and another                        ..... Respondent(s)


                      Through: Mr. Jamrodh Singh, GA for No. 1
                               Mr. A. M. Malik, Advocate for No. 2

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE

                                  ORDER

Mr. Sachin Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner has

vehemently argued that whenever there are two FIRs with regard to the same

occurrence lodged by the parties against each other, one of the FIRs is required

to be closed. In support of this submission, he places reliance upon the

judgment of the Apex Court in T. T. Antony v State of Kerala, (2001) 6 SC

181. He further argued that nothing has been stated by the official respondent

in the status report with regard to the outcome of the FIR lodged by the

petitioner.

The first contention of Mr. Sachin Gupta is utterly misconceived,

as such, the same is rejected. Reliance is placed upon the judgments of Apex

Court in Surinder Kaushik and others v State of Utter Pradesh and others,

(2013) 5 SCC 148 and Amit Bhai Shah Chandra Shah v Central Bureau of

Investigation and others, (2013) 6 SCC 348.

The other contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that

the respondents has not stated anything with regard to outcome of the FIR

lodged by the petitioner, the same too is misconceived as the petitioner has

impugned FIR bearing No. 55/2019 through the present petition and no prayer,

whatsoever, has been made with regard to the other FIR.

At this stage, Mr. Sachin Gupta, learned counsel submits that the

FIR impugned has been lodged with the vendetta. In this respect, the petitioner

can raise this plea before the trial court in the event the challan is filed.

As such, the instant petition is disposed of.

(RAJNESH OSWAL) JUDGE

Jammu 22.11.2021 Rakesh Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No