Sr. No. 12 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CRM (M) No. 425/2024 Javaid Iqbal and another …. Petitioner/Appellant(s) Through:- Mr. S.S Ahmed, Advocate. V/s Anti Corruption Bureau and others …..Respondent(s) Through:- Mr. Raman Sharma, AAG CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL, JUDGE ORDER 19.08.2025 1. Petitioners, being aggrieved of the initiation of an enquiry and being called to the Police Station, Anti Corruption Bureau, Jammu, has filed this petition alleging unnecessary harassment by the respondents. 2. The case of the petitioners is that, without there being any case registered against them, they are being called to the Police Station and harassed. 3. Mr. S.S Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that neither the petitioners could be arrested nor harassed unless or until they proceed with the investigation of case after registration of FIR. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submits that on the basis of some complaint regarding disproportionate assets being accumulated by the petitioners, before registration of the FIR, preliminary enquiry has been initiated to find out as to whether the assets accumulated by the petitioners are disproportionate to their known sources or not. __________ 5. It is further submitted that respondents are to enquire, and it is only after the preliminary enquiry is conducted and it is found that the petitioners has accumulated assets beyond their known sources, that an FIR is registered. 6. It is also submitted that in almost all the cases where the allegations are regarding accumulation of assets beyond known sources, a preliminary enquiry is conducted and nothing wrong can be found in the action of the Police so far as such enquiry is concerned. 7. It is submitted by the Investigating Officer that enquiry is being conducted and petitioners are not being put to any harassment nor they would be detained during such preliminary investigation. The question of arresting would arise only in the event it is found in such enquiry that there is evidence collected during such enquiry pointing towards the allegations against the petitioners having accumulated assets beyond known sources. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. S.S Ahmed, submits that during the conduct of the preliminary enquiry, the petitioners were required to cooperate, however, they would not be put to any harassment or any detention during such period. So far as petitioners’ cooperation in the preliminary enquiry is concerned, they have to appear before the Officer conducting enquiry and provide the information within their knowledge. 9. He further submits that the petitioners would cooperate in future also, provided they are given a notice for appearance and reasons for their requirement in such enquiry. __________ 10. In view of the submissions made above, IO namely Mr. Asgar Hussain, Inspector, who is conducting preliminary enquiry in this case, submitted that whenever petitioners would be required for the enquiry purposes, they would be informed accordingly and about the reasons for their appearance. He further submits that there is no question of harassing them. 11. Therefore, having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the officer inquiring the matter, this petition stands disposed of with a direction that whenever petitioners would be required for the preliminary inquiry, they shall be given advance notice with the purpose of their presence before the Inquiry Officer. Such notice shall be served in advance at least 24 hours prior to their appearance. The petitioners shall, however, remain bound to disclose the information as may be within his knowledge. 12. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of. (Vinod Chatterji Koul) Judge Jammu: 19.08.2025 Shafqat