Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Aug 4: The State High Court today upheld the orders of trial court wherein the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Srinagar was directed to lodge FIR against a police officer allegedly involved in killing of youth. The court also asked the trial court to proceed against the authorities under contempt proceedings in case its orders are not implemented.
Justice Mohammad Yaqoob Mir dismissed the petition of the State challenging the orders of trial court (CJM) whereby it had directed the SSP Srinagar to lodge an FIR against Deputy Superintendant of Police, Yasir Qadri, allegedly involved in killing of a youth recently in Batmaloo area of Srinagar.
Justice Mir while holding the petition of State as devoid of merit and uphold the orders of Chief Judicial Magistrate Srinagar, Masrat Shaheen as legal and in consonance with law asked the trial court to go ahead with the proceedings of victim’s complaint.
Court also said the trial court has exercised its power well within the ambit of law and the orders under challenge (CJM’s orders) do not suffer from any illegality. “Same will not result in causing any injustice nor is found, in any, manner to be abuse of process of the court. Both the orders are upheld. A word of caution, in the event of any default in implementing the said order, Chief Judicial Magistrate shall proceed in accordance with law and if required shall adhere to procedure governing contempt proceedings”, Justice Mir directed.
State Counsel in support of his arguments referred various judgments of Apex Court as also the State law submitted that under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, Magistrate could not order registration of a case but have the power to order investigation in view of protection available under Section 132 of code of criminal procedure.
Court in this backdrop said this argument is in wilderness and referred the chapter 9 of code (CrPC) which deals with the unlawful assemblies. Court said that Section 127 to 131 provides as to how command can be issued for dispersal of the mob or any unlawful assembly causing disturbance to the public peace.
Court said the first occurrence wherein it was mentioned that a violent mob attacked CRPF and blocked the road and for their dispersal security forces used tear smoke shells. Court said the protection under Section referred by State Counsel (section 132 of CrPC) is available to the public servant in the course of those events.
Referring the second occurrence referred during arguments by the Counsel (When police party headed by DySP entered into the house of the victim family), the Court said it is not connected with dispersal of the mob or a part of that action and allegedly while entering into the house, smashing window panes, beating woman, killing her son by no stretch of imagination at this stage can be said to be with the ambit of chapter 9 of the CrPc.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel