Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Anayat Khan & Ors vs Ut Of J&K & Ors on 3 August, 2026
2026:JKLHC-JMU:2401
S. No. 29
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
CRM(M) No. 846/2023
CrlM No. 1637/2023
Anayat Khan & Ors .....Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. M Tariq Mughal, Advocate
UT of J&K & Ors ..... Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Bhanu Jastoria, GA
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE
ORDER
(03.08.2026)
01. Through the medium of instant petition, the petitioners have sought
quashment of FIR No. 0029/2023 dated 11.09.2023, which has been
registered at Police Station Women Cell, Rajouri allegedly for the offences
under Sections 498-A, 109 and 323 IPC to prevent the abuse of process of
law and securing the ends of justice.
02. It has been pleaded in the instant petition that the impugned FIR is false
and frivolous, therefore, it is required to be quashed. It has also been
submitted that the police agency is not investigating the matter fairly which
is against the law and therefore, the FIR according to the learned counsel is
required to be quashed. In addition, it has been submitted that the
allegations leveled in the impugned FIR are absurd and there was no
sufficient ground for proceedings against the accused persons and that the
FIR is manifestly attended with malafide and with an ulterior motive for
harassing and teasing the petitioners with old enmity. It is specific case of
2026:JKLHC-JMU:2401
2 CRM(M) No. 846/2023
the petitioner that the FIR against the petitioners do not fulfill the
ingredients of the offences for which they are being proceeded against and
the FIR in that view of the matter is liable to be quashed.
03. Per Contra, the status report stands filed on behalf of the official
respondents in which they have taken a specific stand that during the
course of investigation, the I.O has visited the spot, prepared site plan of
the place of occurrence and has also recorded the statement of the
complainant as well as the statements of the witnesses under Section 161
CrPC. On the basis of the statements of the complainant and the witnesses
recorded by the concerned I.O under Section 161 CrPC, the offence under
section 323 IPC has not been proved, however, the offence under section
504 IPC has been added by the I.O concerned. On the basis of the
statements of the complainant and the witnesses recorded by the concerned
I.O under Section 161 CrPC and the facts and circumstances of the
investigation, offences under sections 498-A,504,506 IPC has been fully-
proved and established against accused person namely Rashid Khan S/O
Anayat Khan Caste Manhas R/O Gambhir Mughalan Tehsil Manjakote and
offences under sections 498-A,109,504 506 IPC have been fully approved
and establish against accused persons namely 2.Raja Pervaiz S/O Anayat
Khan 3. Anayat Khan S/O Saif Ullah 4. Mst. Sabza Begum W/O Anayat
Khan Caste Manhas R/O Gambhir Mughalan Tehsil Manjakote 5. Mohd
Yousif S/O Nizam Din Caste Bhatti R/O Saaj Tehsil Thanamandi District
Rajouri. It has also been specifically pleaded that the accused person,
2026:JKLHC-JMU:2401
3 CRM(M) No. 846/2023
namely Raja Pervaiz S/O Anayat Khan is absconding after committing the
offence and the remaining accused persons have been granted interim bail
by the order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajouri. The
respondents have also taken a specific stand that the accused persons are
not cooperating with the investigation of the instant case till date in spite of
issuance of many notices under Section 41-A CrPC, which though were
served to the said accused, but they are not co-operating. The record further
reveals that this Court vide order dated 29.09.2023 has allowed the I.O to
investigate the matter, however, laying of the charge sheet, if any, on
conclusion of the Investigation, has been directed to wait till further orders
from this Court.
04. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the
investigation has since been completed and the offences under sections
498-A, 109, 504 506 IPC have been proved against the accused persons
and thus a prayer has been made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the respondents that the rider imposed by this Court be lifted so that the
respondents can produce the challan before the competent Court of law.
Since the offences have been proved against the petitioners/accused and
also the accused are not cooperating, therefore, it is not a case where this
Court can exercise the jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC, which power
has to be exercised sparingly by this Court in the light of the law laid down
by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case titled “State of Haryana & Ors vs Ch.
Bhajan Lal & Ors, reported in 1992 AIR 604.
2026:JKLHC-JMU:2401
4 CRM(M) No. 846/2023
05. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid backdrop, the rival contentions
advanced by the learned counsel for both parties, and the fact that the
offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 109, 504, and 506 of the IPC
stand proved against the accused persons, this Court, in the peculiar facts
and circumstances of the case, deems it appropriate to dispose of the
present writ petition by directing the official respondents to file the challan
before the competent Court of law. Upon the filing of the challan, the
petitioners shall be at liberty to appear before the competent Court and
shall be entitled to raise all available factual and legal grounds in
accordance with law.
06. The writ petition along with connected application is, accordingly, disposed
of in the manner indicated above.
07. The interim direction, if any, shall stand vacated.
(WASIM SADIQ NARGAL)
JUDGE
JAMMU
03.08.2026
Vijay
Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No
Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No
