S. No.84 Suppl.1 List IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CRM(M) No.796/2025 CrlM No.2019/2025 Date of pronouncement:19.12.2025 Uploaded on: .12.2025 GHULAM AHMAD NAIK AND ORS. …..Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Shah Ashiq Hussain, Advocate. V/s UNION TERRITORY OF J&K THROUGH POLICE STATION QAZIGUND AND ANR. … ..Respondent(s) Through : None CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE JUDGMENT(Oral) 1. The petitioners have challenged charge sheet arising out of FIR No.131/2021 of Police Station, Qazigund for offences under Section 147, 447, 354 and 427 IPC, which is stated to be pending before learned Judicial Magistrate (JMIC), Qazigund (hereinafter ‘the trial Magistrate’). 2. As per the allegations made in the impugned charge sheet on 14.05.2021, the petitioners are stated to have caused damage to the barbed fencing of vegetable garden of the complainant and when she objected to it, the petitioner caught hold of the complainant and her minor child aged 4 years and gave beating to them, her clothes were torn out and her modesty was outraged. It is further alleged in the CRM(M) No.796/2025 Page 2 of 4 charge sheet that the minor child of the complainant was thrown in the nearby drain by the petitioners and he was saved because of the intervention of the complainant. It has also been alleged that the petitioners are trying to illegally takeover the possession of the property belonging to the complainant and her husband. The aforesaid allegations made in the charge sheet have been substantiated by the statements of witnesses and the material collected by the investigating agency, whereafter the charge sheet has been filed against the petitioners. 3. According to the petitioners the whole case is concocted and unsubstantiated. It has been submitted that the learned trial Magistrate has proceeded against the petitioners under Section 299 of Cr.P.C, which is contrary to the procedure prescribed under law. It has been contended that a civil dispute is pending between the petitioners and the complainant relating to the land in question and the impugned charge sheet has been laid at the behest of the complainant with a view to coerce them to settle the civil dispute. It has been further contended that the complainant and her family are repeatedly encroaching upon land of the petitioners. It has been also contended that the impugned challan filed against the petitioners is an attempt on the part of the complainant to wreak vengeance upon them. CRM(M) No.796/2025 Page 3 of 4 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the contents of the impugned challan. 5. So far as the allegations made in the FIR, out of which the impugned chalan arises are concerned, same disclose the commission of cognizable offences, as there are specific allegations against the petitioners that they have trespassed into the land of the complainant, whereafter they have outraged her modesty and given beating to her and her minor child. These allegations are substantiated by the statements of the witnesses recorded during the investigation of the case and other material collected by the Investigating Agency. Therefore, it cannot be stated that the allegations leveled against the petitioners are baseless. 6. The contention of the petitioners that the impugned challan is outcome of a civil dispute between the parties and, as such, the same deserves to be quashed is misconceived because in every criminal offence there is an underlying civil dispute between the parties. Merely because there is a land dispute going on between the petitioners and the complainant, it does not mean that no criminal proceeding can be set into motion against the petitioners even if the material on record shows that they are involved in commission of criminal offences. CRM(M) No.796/2025 Page 4 of 4 7. So far as the initiation of proceedings under Section 299 Cr.P.C are concerned, it shall be open to the petitioners to approach the learned trial Magistrate and seek cancellation of warrants issued by the said Court against them after surrendering before the Court. 8. For the foregoing reasons, I do not find any merit in this petition. The same is, accordingly, dismissed. (SANJAY DHAR) JUDGE SRINAGAR 19.12.2025 Sarveeda Nissar Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No Sarveeda Nissar I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document every page at bottom left side 20.12.2025 16:46