HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Case: CRM(M) No. 897/2021 CrlM No. 2480/2021 CrlM No. 2481/2021 Bagh Hussain & Ors. …. Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s) Through :- Mr. K. K. Pathan, Advocate V/s UT of J&K & Ors. ….Respondent(s) Through :- Mr. Eishaan Dadhichi, GA Mr. Nahiem Sheikh, Advocate Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SEKHRI, JUDGE JUDGMENT 06.08.2025 ORAL 01. Petitioners have invoked inherent jurisdiction of this Court for quashment of FIR No. 332/2021 dated 23.09.2021 registered with Police Station, Surankote for offences under Sections 452, 323, 34 IPC inter alia on the ground of false implication. 02. As factual narration of the present case would unfurl, the private respondent No. 3, on 23.09.2021, lodged a written complaint against the petitioners alleging, inter alia that on account of land dispute, at about 9:00 hours, they suddenly started beating her daughter, Iqbal Bi, while she was cutting grass. On raising hue and cry, husband of the complainant reached the spot and tried to save her daughter from the clutches of the petitioners-accused, but they also started beating her husband. The complainant goes on to allege that Sr.No. 24 2 CRM(M) No. 897/2021 her husband and daughter somehow managed to escape and went to their house, but the petitioners followed them, entered into her house and assaulted the whole family and fled from the spot. 03. On the receipt of this report, the impugned FIR came to be registered against the petitioners. During investigation, the investigating officer recorded statements of material prosecution witnesses including the injured and obtained medical certificate in this respect. The weapon of offence, Lathi was also recovered from the scene of occurrence. 04. It also surfaced during investigation that a case, FIR No. 331/2021 under Sections 452, 323, 147 and 148 IPC was already registered against the private respondent, Maqbool Hussain and others. As per the Investigating Agency, the said FIR was the reason that petitioner No. 1-Bagh Hussain and petitioner No. 3- Layaqat Ali, in furtherance of common criminal intention restrained the private respondent, Maqbool Hussain and others and started beat them with fists, blows and lathis, as a result whereof, respondents, Maqbool Hussain, Rani Bi, Iqbal Bi and Guddi Bi were injured. 05. According to the Investigating Agency, offences under Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 34 IPC are proved against the petitioners/accused-Bagh Hussain and Layaqat Ali and investigation has culminated in the final report. 06. The petitioners are aggrieved of the impugned FIR, primarily, on the ground that it is a counter blast to FIR No. 331/2021 lodged by petitioner No. 1. 07. A perusal of FIR No. 331/2021, stated to have been lodged by petitioner No. 1, indicates that the occurrence in the said FIR came to happen on 3 CRM(M) No. 897/2021 23.09.2021, between 11:00 hours to 11:30 hours, whereas, the occurrence in the present case is alleged to have taken place between 9:00 hours to 9:30 hours. It is evident from the perusal of both the FIRs that there are two different occurrences which took place on the same date. 08. This Court is vested with inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC (now 528 BNSS) to prevent the abuse of the process of any law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. 09. It is trite that if allegation made in the FIR or the complaint, as the case may be, taken in entirety at their face value, prima facie do not disclose the commission of cognizable offence or where the allegations are absurd or improbable or where criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with malafide to wreak vengeance and instituted with an interior motive, this Court is justified to exercise the inherent jurisdiction and quash the FIR or the complaint to prevent the abuse of the process of law. However, a perusal of the impugned FIR and the investigation prima facie discloses the commission of cognizable offences against petitioners No. 1 & 3. 10. The plea taken by the petitioners that impugned FIR has been lodged by the private respondent as a counter blast to the FIR lodged by petitioner No. 1 against the private respondent is required to be proved by them in defence during the trial. At this stage, this Court, in exercise of inherent jurisdiction, cannot embark upon an inquiry as to the genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR. As per the status report, offences have been made out against the petitioners No. 1 and 3, namely, Bagh Hussain and Layaqat Ali. 4 CRM(M) No. 897/2021 11. Having regard to the above, the present petition being devoid of merit, is dismissed along with connected CrlM(s). Insofar as petitioners No. 2 and 4 are concerned, the petition against them has been rendered infructuous and is dismissed. 12. Interim direction, if any, shall stand vacated. (RAJESH SEKHRI) JUDGE Jammu: 06.08.2025 Meenakshi