news details |
|
|
| DC Kishtwar had no jurisdiction to direct police for registration of FIR | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Dec 29: In a petition filled by Early Times senior correspondent Asif Iqbal Naik against the registration of an FIR on the direction of the Deputy Commissioner Kishtwar on the basis of complaint filed by one Junaid Hussain Malik Son of Late Ghulam Mohammad Malik Resident of Ward No. 7 Malik Mohallah Kishtwar, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court stayed the impugned FIR on the ground pledged by the counsel of the petitioner that DC Kishtwar had no jurisdiction to order the police for registration of the FIR in this instant case.
Advocate Faheem Shokat Butt while arguing in the petition stated that the aggrieved of illegal and arbitrary registration of FIR bearing registration No. 105/2018 Dated 28-04-2018 registered by Police Station Kishtwar against the petitioner under section 504/505/506/336 RPC on the direction of District Development Commissioner Kishtwar who was approached by the respondent No. 4 (Junaid Hussain Malik), the petitioner is assailing the same on the ground that the FIR impugned is motivated in order to achieve collateral purpose as even no offence is made out from perusal of the impugned FIR or otherwise also the procedure alien to law has been taken in the instant matter.
Advocate Faheem Shokar Butt further argued that there is no provision of the criminal procedure code to approach the DC seeking directions to police to register FIR whereas the comprehensive procedure has been laid down in Part V Chapter XIV of CrPc for registration of FIR is cognizable offence, the aggrieved person has to approach the concerned incharge of Police Station for registration of an FIR failing which he has to approach the concerned SP of the District and even if no such action is taken on the bases of the complaint, then provision of section 156 (3) of CrPc can be invoked by approaching the Chief Judicial Magistrate of the area seeking direction to concern police station to register an FIR added that since Section 505 RPC is special offence as such preliminary enquiry as warranted under section 196 (b) of CrPc was required to be ordered by the District Magistrate before registration of FIR.
He further stated that respondent No. 2 (Angrez Singh Rana) has not directed the police to register the FIR in the capacity of District Magistrate, but in the capacity of District Development Commissioner which he (Rana) is not authorized to do and hence pledge for quashment of the FIR under section 561-A Cr.Pc.
On the basis of the arguments of counsel of the petitioner, Justice Dehraj Singh Thakur stayed the FIR and fixed the next date of hearing for list on 25-2-2019.
"The case of the petitioner is that the Executive Magistrate could not have directed the police agency to register an FIR nor can the police register an FIR on the asking of the Executive Magistrate. Reliance is placed upon apex court judgment in "Naman Singh Alias Naman Pratap Singh and another Vs State of Utter Pradesh and others", decided on 13-12-2018" read the order and issued the notice to respondents returnable within six weeks. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
