Excelsior Correspondent
SRINAGAR, June 12: High Court directed the Chief Judicial Magistrate Srinagar to call the complainant for recording his statement in FIR registered against two cops for demanding gratification from him and directed the Investigating Officer to produce the Case Diary before trial court.
The petition has been filed by delinquent SHO for seeking quashing of FIR registered against him and Constable of police station Nishat. It is as per the FIR the complainant Ali Mohammad Kathoo, lodged a written report with Senior Superintendent of Police, Srinagar, who in turn forwarded the same to Superintendent of Police, East Zone, Srinagar, with the direction that action as warranted under law may be initiated against the erring police officers.
In the complaint it was alleged that Kathoo was granted ticketing contract of Tulip Garden but the petitioner-Rais Hussain Wani, who happened to be the SHO of Police Station, Nishat, at the relevant time and one of the police constables-Sarshad Ahmad continuously demanded bribe of Rs 4 to 5 lakhs and Rs 5000 per day from him with the threatening that if their demand is not met, traffic would be diverted which would cause loss to his business and unnecessarily harassed him. On the basis of this report, the impugned FIR came to be registered and investigation was set into motion.
Justice Sanjay Dhar before determining the merits of the rival contentions raised by counsel for the parties, directed for recording of statement of complainant by a Magistrate in terms of Section 164 of Cr. P.C.
“Accordingly, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srinagar, is directed to summon complainant and record his statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Investigating Officer shall produce the Case Diary before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srinagar, on the date that may be fixed by the Magistrate. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, after recording the statement of complainant shall forward a copy thereof to this Court”, Justice Dhar directed.
A perusal of the case diary reveals that the complainant has made a statement before the police during the investigation of the case, wherein he has levelled allegation that the petitioner-SHO demanded bribe from him but in his reply filed before the Court in the instant proceedings he has submitted that it is only Head Constable Sarshad Hussain who has demanded bribe from him and that the petitioner has not taken bribe from him.
On the other hand, the counsel appearing for the respondent-prosecution has submitted that exoneration of the petitioner-SHO in the departmental proceedings is without prejudice to the outcome of the FIR. Therefore, merely because of his exoneration in the departmental proceedings cannot offer a ground for quashing the FIR as also the complainant has, during the course of investigation, clearly implicated the petitioner-SHO by making a statement to this effect.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
