Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Nov 5: High Court today dismissed three petitions filed by Hans Raj and Hussain Baksh, the then Zonal Officers and Majid Hussain, Bua Ditta and Chaman Lal, employees in the office of Relief and Rehabilitation Department seeking quashment of proceedings pending before the Trial Court.
According to the case, on September 28, 1999 Crime Branch received a complaint from Surain Singh, son of Makhan Singh of Mira Sahib mentioning that one Inderjeet Singh working in PHE Department had fraudulently got himself registered as migrant with the assistance of officers/officials of the Relief and Rehabilitation Department and has been receiving cash relief since February, 1992 without being entitled for the same.
The investigation was concluded as proved against Inderjeet Singh as also against Hussain Baksh, Chaman Lal, Hans Raj, Majid Hussain and Bua Ditta officials/officers of the Relief and Rehabilitation Department. The officers/officials were alleged to have in connivance with beneficiary fabricated verification report, avoided to discharge their duties that they were expected to be perform while processing the case of Inderjeet Singh for registration as migrant from Kashmir Valley.
The charge sheet was presented against the accused before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu on October 6, 2008 and the accused were formally charged with offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 RPC on April 15, 2010.
The accused Hans Raj and Hussain Baksh were Zonal officers at the time of alleged occurrence while as Majid Hussain, Bua Ditta and Chaman Lal were employees in the office of Zone 21 of Relief and Rehabilitation Department.
After hearing battery of lawyers appearing for the petitioners, Justice Hasnain Massodi observed, “the grounds urged in the petition may constitute a good defence before the trial court but cannot be pressed into service in a petition under Section 561-A as such a petition cannot be used to hi-jack the proceedings before the trial court”.
“Whether the petitioners while performing the duties were required to go on spot and make spot verification in the manner required of them under rules/Government instructions is to be looked into by the trial proceeding. The criminal proceedings pending against petitioners do not amount to abuse of process of Court or otherwise call for exercise of inherent power”, Justice Massodi said.
With these observations, all petitions were dismissed and in view of long pendency of the matter the trial court was directed to proceed in the matter with due dispatch. “Trial Court may not insist on personal appearance of such of the petitioners who because of old age or otherwise are not in a position to appear before the trial court on each and every date, except where their presence is required to make progress in the trial”, Justice Massodi said.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel