LAWS(J&K)-2019-4-10

SAJJAD TARIQ Vs. STATE OF J&K

Decided On April 12, 2019
Sajjad Tariq Appellant
V/S
STATE OF JANDK Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the instant petition filed under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter for short, Cr.P.C.) petitioner seeks quashment of criminal proceedings titled State vs. M. S. Tariq and another, pending against the petitioner in the court of Railway Magistrate, Jammu.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that on a written report of one Mohinder Singh a false case was registered in Police Station Bahu Fort, Jammu against the deceased father of the petitioner, namely, Mohd Sharief Tariq and the petitioner herein with the allegations that on 12th November, 2009 at about 10.35 AM, when said complainant Mohinder Singh came to attend his office as a Chairman of J&K Cooperative Bank at Sekhari Bhawan, Bahu Plaza, Railway Road, Jammu, he found a big crowd at the gate of the Bank and saw Mohd Sharief Tariq and the petitioner breaking open the lock of his office room with an Ari ( Blade) and when he objected to it, he was man handled by the said culprits and Mohd Sharief Tariq occupied his chair without any authority. The complainant requested SHO Police Station Trikuta Nagar/Bahu Fort to oust the said person from his room. On the said report, a case for commission of offences under Sections 451, 323 RPC came to be registered in said Police Station. The police investigated the case and during theinvestigation besides taking other steps, the statements of the complainant Mohinder Singh, Barkat Ali, Peon in the said Bank, Parkash Sharma-Secretary to the Complainant and one Goutam Singh under Section 161-Cr.P.C came to be recorded and after completing the investigation charge sheet against the deceased father of the petitioner, namely. Mohd Sharie Tariq and the petitioner under Sections 451, 323, 201 RPC was filed in the court of law which is now pending disposal in the court of learned Railway Magistrate, Jammu. It is further stated that father of the petitioner, who expired long before the charge was submitted in the court of law, has been arrayed as main accused in the charge sheet.

(3.) The petitioner seeks quashment of the aforesaid proceedings, on the following grounds:-