HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CRMC No. 672/2018 Pronounced on : 09.05.2025 Pankaj Khajuria & ors. …. Petitioner(s) Through:- Mr. Jagpaul Singh, Advocate V/s Station House Officer Police Station Lakhanpur …..Respondent(s) Through:- Mr. Rajesh Thappa, DyAG CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, JUDGE JUDGMENT 01. By way of this petition, the petitioners invoked inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 561-A Cr.P.C. for quashing FIR No. 108 dated 02.10.2018 by which offences under Sections 8/15 NDPS Act and 147, 148, 353, 323,109 RPC have been registered against the petitioners, who are the forest officials. 02. Briefly stated the facts of this case are that the petitioners, who are forest officers, were posted in Anti Polythene Check Post Lakhanpur in the Forest Division. On 02.10.2018 at about 3.15 pm, the petitioners received information that forest produce was being illegally carried in a Truck No. JK13A-9512 from out of J&K State, as such, they laid a Naka and taken the said truck in the office of petitioner CRMC No. 672/2018 No. 1. Thereafter, the respondent along with other police personnel broke opened the locks of the gate of Forest Check post and started beating the petitioners and other forest officials and during this scuffle, ear drum of petitioner No. 2 was got damaged and truck was driven by the respondent from the Forest Check post. Petitioner No. 1, immediately after the incident, reported the matter to Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division, Kathua, who took up the matter with SSP Kathua District vide his communication dated 03.10.2018. It is averred that petitioner No. 2 had suffered serious injuries by attack, as such, MLC was also registered and on 04.10.2018, petitioner No. 2 moved an application before SSP Kathua for registration of the FIR against the respondent and other police personnel but he refused to do so and unfortunately, no FIR was registered. 03. It is alleged that subsequently, when the respondent came to know about the fact that petitioner No. 2 had approached SSP Kathua for registration of FIR on 04.10.2018, an FIR No. 108/2018 was registered in Police Station Lakhanpur for the offences under Sections 8/15 NDPS Act and 147, 148, 353, 323,109 RPC and the petitioners were also roped in the said FIR 04. The petitioners submit that on 03.10.2018, physical verification of the truck was conducted wherein 50 boxes of CRMC No. 672/2018 poppy straw weighing 524.52 kg were recovered and petitioner No. 1 himself asked the respondent to take the truck and take appropriate legal action. They further submit that when the SSP has not taken any action against the respondent and others, the petitioners approached this Court by way of OWP No. 2097/2018 and this Court vide order dated 12.10.2018 was pleased to pass an order, which reads as under:- “Meanwhile, subject to objections, / Inspector General of Police, Jammu Zone is directed to consider the prayer of the petitioners for registration of an FIR and appropriate decision be taken within one week thereafter. Needless to say that the police is under an obligation to register a case, in case a cognizable offence is shown to have been committed. Further, considering the fact that the allegations have been made against the police officers themselves, in case the respondent no.3 comes to a conclusion that an FIR has to be registered, then the same be investigated by an officer not below the rank of superintendent of police, not connected with the Kathua jurisdiction.” 05. They served the copy of this order upon IGP Jammu Zone but till date nothing has been done despite lapse of time limit fixed by the Court which clearly reflects that the police are adopting all possible means to shield the erring police personnel and roping the petitioners in the aforesaid FIR, as such, they seek quashing of the FIR. 06. In the status report filed by the respondent, it is submitted that on 02.10.2018, Sgct Labh Krisan of PP Industrial Hatli Morh reported at the Police Station and CRMC No. 672/2018 produced a docket which reveals that some police personnel were on naka vehicle checking duty at Govindsar Morh and during naka checking, Police party signaled to stop the truck No. JK13A-9512 but the driver of the truck did not obey the signal and run away from the spot and the Police Personnel followed the said truck and checked the same in which 01 Kg poppy straw was recovered but in the meanwhile, 5/6 employees of the Forest Department cam on spot and obstruct the police and while over powering took the truck to unknown place. 07. 07. The truck was traced in traffic Jam and upon enquiry, the driver disclosed his name as Hardeep Singh. On the search of cabin of the Truck, 1 Kg poppy straw was recovered from the tool box. The Forest officer with common intention obstructed the police officials and took truck to some unknown place. Hence the driver and Forest officials have committed the offences and FIR No. 108/2018 for offences under Sections 8/15 NDPS Act and 147/148/353/109 RPC stands registered against them. 08. Perusal of the said FIR reveals that the truck bearing No. JK-13A/9512 coming from Jammu was signaled to stop but the driver fled away from the spot towards Lakhanpur. The Truck was stuck in jam and during search of cabin, contraband was found in the cabin of the truck in the tool CRMC No. 672/2018 box. The employees of the Forest Department in Check Post Lakhanpur appeared on spot and obstructed the Police officials while discharging the duty and took the driver to unknown place in order to help the accused. As per the report, the Forest officials with common intention took away the truck to unknown place which was loaded with contraband, therefore, it is stated that they had committed the offences under Sections 8/15 NDPS Act and 147/148/353/109 RPC. 09. Per Contra learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the truck was apprehended by the petitioners along with other Forest officials as it was illegally carrying forest produce and the same was taken at forest check post which is adjacent to Police Station. The respondent drove away the truck after opening the lock of the Forest Check Post. It was only when the petitioners approached the SSP Kathua for registration of the FIR and same was registered. The respondent handed over the truck to the Forester on 02.10.2018. It is only after physical verification of the truck in which poppy straw was recovered and truck was handed over to the respondent. 10. A bare perusal of the FIR reveals that the same has been registered against the driver of the truck, who was transporting the contraband. The petitioners, who are Forest officials and were discharging their duties, have been roped in only on the ground that they were obstructing their duties. CRMC No. 672/2018 11. The only issue which arises for consideration is regarding the registration of FIR against the petitioners, who are employees of the Forest Department and were discharging their duties in contravention to the provisions of Jammu and Kashmir Forest Act. It appears that Section 42 of the Jammu and Kashmir Forest Act, which prohibits taking of cognizance of any offence against the Forest Officer, was not considered by the respondent. This section reads as under: “42. Forest officers to be public servants: (1) No suit or criminal proceeding or other legal proceeding shall be initiated against any public servant for anything done by him in good faith under this Act. (2) No Court shall take cognizance of any offence alleged to have been committed by a Forest Officer while acting or purporting to act ill the discharge of his official duty except with the previous sanction of the Government. Indemnity for act done in good faith. - No suit shall lie against any public servant for anything done by him in good faith under this Act.” 12. The petitioners, who are the employees of the Forest Department in discharge of their duty, had stopped the truck which was carrying illegal forest produce. The truck was driven away by the respondent from the Forest Check Post. This was reported to the Divisional Forest Officer, who took up the matter with the Senior Superintendent of Police on 03.10.2018. The truck was handed over to the petitioners, who after physical verification of the same found poppy straw CRMC No. 672/2018 along with 450 boxes of fresh fruits and handed over the same to the respondent. 13. The petitioners, who are officers of the Forest Department, were discharging their official duty and therefore, cannot be prosecuted without obtaining the requisite sanction from the government. The registration of the FIR against them is sheer abuse of process as there are no sufficient grounds for proceeding against the petitioners. 14. The scope of exercising inherent power under Section 482 of CrPC in given cases has been considered by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in State of Haryana and others V. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others’, reported as (1990) 0 Supreme (SC) 740 wherein it has been held that such power can be exercised to prevent abuse of process of anywhere or to secure the ends of justice where it can be exercised that: “108. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised. CRMC No. 672/2018 1. Where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they a, taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. 2. Where the allegations in the First Information Report and other materials, if any, accompanying the F. I. R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156 (1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. 3. Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. 4. Where, the allegations in the F.I.R. do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. 5. Where the allegations made in the F.I.R. or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. 6. Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/ or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. 7. Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/ or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge. 15. In view the aforesaid discussions and to prevent the abuse of process of the Court and to secure the ends of justice, this petition is allowed and FIR No. 108 dated CRMC No. 672/2018 02.10.2018 qua the petitioners is quashed. Connected application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (Sindhu Sharma) Judge Jammu: 09.05..2025 Ram Murti Whether approved for reporting : Yes/No Ram Murti 2025.07.09 14:45 I am the author of this document