Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, May 6: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed a petition filed by Aijaz Hussain Sahaf, former Executive Engineer, seeking quashing of FIR No. 09/2015 registered by Crime Branch Kashmir in an alleged service-book tampering and date-of-birth manipulation case.
The petitioner had approached the High Court under Section 561-A CrPC seeking quashment of the FIR registered at Police Station Crime Branch, Kashmir, for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 RPC.
The case pertains to allegations that the petitioner manipulated the first page of his service book by changing his date of birth from August 28, 1955 to August 28, 1958. According to the case record, a preliminary inquiry by Crime Branch was earlier closed as “not proved”. However, the matter was simultaneously referred to the department for a departmental inquiry.
The departmental inquiry later concluded that the petitioner had tampered with his service records and changed his date of birth, after which the matter was referred back to Crime Branch for action under law.
The petitioner argued that the FIR was motivated, lodged only to harass him and that the Under Secretary had no locus to lodge the complaint. He also contended that since an earlier inquiry had given him a clean chit, a second FIR on the same facts was not legally sustainable.
Rejecting these submissions, the High Court held that closure of a preliminary verification does not amount to a judicial closure report and cannot prevent registration of an FIR when subsequent material discloses commission of cognizable offences.
The court observed that the investigation had collected important material, including the petitioner’s matriculation certificate, school records, service book, statements of witnesses and a communication from the J&K Board of School Education confirming the petitioner’s date of birth as August 28, 1955.
The court further noted that the most crucial evidence was the FSL report dated July 18, 2014, which opined that the original date of birth of the petitioner was August 28, 1955 and not August 28, 1958, thereby confirming tampering in the service record.
Justice Shahzad Azeem held that where information discloses commission of a cognizable offence, registration of FIR under Section 154 CrPC becomes mandatory. The High Court further held that exoneration or relief in disciplinary proceedings does not automatically entitle an accused to quashing of criminal proceedings, as departmental proceedings are decided on preponderance of probabilities while criminal cases require proof beyond reasonable doubt.
The court made it clear that while exercising inherent jurisdiction, it cannot conduct a mini trial or re-weigh the evidence collected during investigation, as such matters fall within the domain of the trial court.
Dismissing the petition as devoid of merit, the court vacated all interim directions and granted liberty to the Investigating Officer to proceed in accordance with law.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
