Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, July 18: High Court has refused to quash trial court proceedings in grabbing and issuing NOCs fraudulently for sale and purchase of Defence land in Srinagar by observing that the trial court has substantially progressed in trial of the case.
The petitioner-Ajay Choudhary, the then Defence Estate Officer happens to be one of the accused in FIR registered with Police Station, CBI/AC-1, New Delhi, has challenged two chargesheets laid against him as also the orders by virtue of which Special Judge, Anti-corruption, Kashmir, Srinagar has framed charges against him.
As per impugned chargesheet, the FIR came to be registered on the basis of a complaint wherein it was alleged that the petitioner-Choudhary, the then Defence Estate Officer, co-accused Vijay Kumar, the then SDO-I, and Amarjeet Kour, the then SDO-II, in the Defence Estate Office, Kashmir, Circle Badami Bagh, Srinagar, in connivance with the Revenue Officials of the J&K State and other unknown public servants/private persons grabbed huge area of Air Force land near a sensitive security zone in Srinagar.
It was alleged in the FIR that during the period from 2006-2010, the petitioner-accused and the other accused in conspiracy with unknown private persons dishonestly and fraudulently issued NOCs to private persons for the purpose of sale and purchase of Defence land which was either acquired by the Defence or was part of ex-State Forces land or was involved in mutation No.182.
It was further alleged in the complaint that 64 cases of NOCs had been processed in the office of Defence Estate Officer, Srinagar, and while issuing these NOCs for sale and purchase of Defence land pertaining to villages Naroo and Karewa Damodar of District Budgam and Sonwar, Srinagar, the petitioner-accused and other officials ignored the status of the land as available in the records and recorded incorrect status of the land in the NOCs issued by them, as a result of which, certain private persons dishonestly and fraudulently managed to execute sale deeds and consequent attestation of mutations in respect of Defence land and some of the private persons approached Deputy Commissioner, Budgam, as also the Civil Court seeking compensation on the basis of sale deeds executed in respect of the Defence land.
“I do not find this a fit case where this Court should exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C to quash the impugned proceedings and the impugned orders, particularly when the trial of the case before the trial court has progressed substantially. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed”, Justice Sanjay Dhar concluded.
Justice Dhar while refusing to quash trial court proceedings said that the High Court while exercising its powers of revision or its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C that unless prosecution against the accused is illegitimate so as to result in abuse of process of law, it would not be appropriate to interfere in the order of framing charges against the accused.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
