Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Nov 22: Railway Magistrate Jammu Yahaya Firdous has issued notice to SSP Crime Branch for explaining as to why contempt shall not be framed against him for disobedience of the court order dated 26-09-2017 and causing huge delay in filing the compliance report.
After going through the order dated 26-09-2017 and the letter of Additional Superintendent of Police Crime Branch Jammu, Railway Magistrate observed, “this court is constrained to observe that SSP Crime Branch Jammu has substantiated the claim of the applicant mentioned in the application wherein the Crime Branch has been alleged to be biased for non registration of the case when the complainant approached the SSP Crime Branch”.
“Though Senior PO submitted that under the SRO it is mandatory to go for preliminary verification of the complaint before lodging the FIR but this submission has raised question mark on the working of Crime Branch which perhaps is working against the law laid down by the Apex Court from time to time vis-à-vis Section 156 (3) CrPC”, the court further observed.
“Since, it is beaten law of the land that when there is direction from the Magistrate for registration of the case under Section 156(3) CrPC, the Station House Officer has no option but to register the case. The question arises as to how can Station House Officer (SSP Crime Branch) initiate preliminary enquiry after the direction of the Magistrate for registration of FIR”, the court said, adding “in case, the preliminary enquiry is initiated after the direction of the Magistrate for registration of the case it would not only amount to scrutinizing the court direction but would also defeat the law laid down by the Apex Court”.
“Even for the sake of the argument, as contended by Sr PO that the preliminary verification is mandatory, let us presume that the preliminary verification concluded by SSP Crime Branch is negative, the question arises whether such preliminary verification conducted by SSP Crime Branch would justify for non registration of the FIR”, Railway Magistrate said, adding “the preliminary verification initiated by the SSP Crime Branch after the direction of the court would also amount to questioning the court order, which is passed only after the court frames its opinion that a prima facie and cognizable case is made out”.
“The court is of the view that this is a fit case where a contempt can be framed against the SSP for his willful disobedience of the court order dated 26-09-2017, but prior to framing the contempt, it would be appropriate to issue notice to him to explain as to why contempt shall not be framed against him for disobedience of the court order”, Railway Magistrate further said.
Follow our WhatsApp channel