Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Apr 3: High Court has upheld the trial court orders taking cognizance in the commission of offences against the accused persons for protesting and sloganeering against the Government.
The petitioners along with others are accused in FIR No. 79/2012 dated 09.10.2012 for commission of offences under Sections 332, 353, 336 and 147 RPC. The allegations against them are that on 09.10.2012, they were protesting against the J&K Government and had blocked the traffic movement.
It is submitted that they were persuaded to give up the protest but in vain and they continued to shout slogans against the J&K Government. When the SHO asked them about the permission for holding the protest, the protesters started abusing and pelting stones on them, as a result of which, one PSO, was injured. Later, the Police succeeded in dispersing the mob.
The trial court vide order dated 06.03.2018 ordered framing of charge against the petitioners for commission of offences under Sections 332, 353, 336 and 147 RPC.
A perusal of the charge sheet reveals that after the commission of alleged offence, the searches of the accused were conducted but they could not be traced and thereafter, the investigation was handed over to Sub-Inspector, who conducted the search of the accused persons and six accused persons were arrested and released on bail.
Thereafter some more accused persons were arrested and released on bail. The charge sheet has been laid against 12 accused persons. “As the petitioners were arrested in the months of February and May, 2016, whereas the offence was committed on 09.10.2012, therefore, the period for which they have avoided their arrest, has to be excluded for the purpose of computing limitation and as such”, Justice Rajnesh Oswal clarified.
Court further added that the trial court has not committed any illegality while taking cognizance of the offences as mentioned in the charge sheet. The arguments on behalf of the counsel for the petitioners are not applicable in the present facts and circumstance of the case.
“Both the trial court as well as revisional court have rightly determined the issue of limitation, therefore, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the orders passed by both courts. Accordingly, the present petition is found to be without merit and the same is dismissed”, court concluded.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel