Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Aug 30: High Court has upheld the FIR registered against the Assistant Professor in the Higher Education Department for anti national activities.
Justice Sanjeev Dhar while dismissing the plea of petitioner-Abdul Bari Naik working as Assistant Professor Geography in Government Degree College challenging the FIR registered against him under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act concluded that the material collected by the investigating agency during the investigation of the case clearly suggests that Naik is provoking or at least intending to provoke his audience to use force or violence against the institutions like the army, the police and the civil administration.
The video clips uploaded by the petitioner, court added, prima facie shows that he is trying to promote enmity between the people living in Kashmir and those living in other parts of the country. Court said, it cannot be stated that the material on record does not disclose commission of any cognizable offence against him.
“As to what offences are exactly established or made out against the petitioner would be known only after the investigation is completed by the respondents and final report is laid before the competent court but at this stage of the investigation, it can safely be stated that the material collected by the investigating agency so far, does disclose commission of cognizable offences against the petitioner”, Justice Dhar added.
The petitioner, however, submitted that in January, 2017, he had filed a writ petition before this Court calling into question the illegal extraction of minerals wherein an interim direction was passed by this Court and as a consequence of this, District Magistrate, Kulgam, asked Principal, Government Degree College, Kulgam, to enquire into the activities of the petitioner and according to him, all the activities irked the respondents, as a consequence whereof, the impugned FIR came to be lodged against him.
The respondents have resisted and rebutted these contentions of the petitioner and submitted that he is indulging in criminal activities and he is misusing and abusing the freedom of expression by taking aid of social media. According to respondent-prosecution, the activities of the petitioner have the effect of motivating the students of the college to disrupt peace and tranquillity in the area as he is provoking them to indulge in violence against the State Administration.
Prosecution further goes to submit that in order to gain cheap popularity within the area, he is using illegal means to prevent the district administration from discharging their lawful activities as such impugned FIR has been registered on the basis of credible reports in respect of him which clearly disclose commission of cognizable offences against him.
Upon perusal of the Case Diary which reveals that after registration of the impugned FIR, the respondents have recorded statements of the witnesses under Section 161 of the Cr. P. C and have also seized the video clips which are alleged to have been uploaded by the petitioner on YouTube.
“Having regard to the nature of material supporting the allegations contained in the impugned FIR, the prosecution against the petitioner appears to be genuine. Thus, the instant case does not fall into the category of cases in which this Court would exercise its powers under Section 482 of the Cr. P. C to quash the proceedings in the impugned FIR. Quashing the proceedings in the instant case would amount to stifling a genuine prosecution which is impermissible in law. For the forgoing reasons, there is no merit in this petition. The same is, accordingly, dismissed”, Court concluded.
Follow our WhatsApp channel