Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court: A petition was filed by the petitioners where they challenged the charge sheet emanating from FIR for offences under Sections 142, 148, 323, and 506 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) stating that they were not present on spot at the time of the incident. A Single Judge Bench of Sanjay Dhar, J., dismissed the petition and held that the veracity of the contention of the plea of alibi could only be delved into by the trial Court.
The respondent stated that the petitioners along with other co-accused persons, armed with axes, knives and iron rods, attacked him while he was undertaking repairs to his house which resulted in injuries to his head and other parts of the body. A FIR was registered against the petitioners for offences under Sections 142, 148, 323, and 506 IPC. It was alleged by the petitioners that the police did not investigate the matter in its proper perspective and that the FIR was filed because the respondent wanted to wreak vengeance upon him over a civil dispute.
The petitioners contended that they were not present on the spot at the time of the incident as they were discharging their official duties at respective places of their posting and as such, the challan could not have been filed against them. Petitioner 1 stated that he worked as Selection Grade Constable in the Police and was posted at Ahstan Sharief Jinab Sahib Soura and was discharging his duty over there. It was further submitted that Petitioner 2 worked as a teacher at Higher Secondary School, Shopian and on the date of the incident, he was discharging his duty as Invigilator. Regarding Petitioner 3, it was submitted that he was working as a Lecturer in Higher Secondary School, Keegam, and he was also discharging his duty at that time.
The Court, while dismissing the petition, observed that the plea of alibi put forward by the petitioners could not form the ground for quashing the challan and only the trial Court could go into the veracity of the defence put up by them. The Court opined that the allegations contained in the FIR clearly disclosed the commission of cognizable offences by the petitioners.
The Court also opined that it could not hold a mini trial to ascertain the veracity of the defence put up by them in exercise of its powers under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNSS’). The Court held that if the petitioners felt that their defence was not investigated by the Investigating Agency, they could approach the trial Magistrate before whom the charge-sheet was filed and seek further investigation of the case.
[Abdul Qayoom Ganie v. State (UT of J&K), 2025 SCC OnLine J&K 643, decided on 5-6-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Petitioners: Mudasir Bin Hassan, Advocate.
Buy Penal Code, 1860 HERE
