Srinagar: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh on Thursday declined to quash an FIR after observing that under Article 226 of the Constitution read with Section 482 CrPc the Court should refrain from making prima facie decision at interlocutory stage when the final report submitted is yet to be examined for framing charges.
The bench of Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey while giving reference to Supreme Court directives in case titled Som Mittal Vs Govt of Karnataka recorded that the inherent power of the Court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be invoked by the High Court either to prevent abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.
It was also noted by court that the inherent power of the High Court should not be exercised according to whims and caprice and it has to be exercised sparingly with circumspection and in the rarest of rare cases.
“The power under Section 482 is not intended to scuttle justice at the threshold, “the writ court said while giving reference to Som Mittal’s case.
The court observed all these facts in a plea filed by one family of Kupwara who sought quashment of FIR No. 18/2018 under sections 148, 149, 341, 323, 325 and 34 registered with Police Station Kralpora Kupwara as also the proceedings pending before the trial court.
It was submitted by the petitioner family that they were going to construct Masjid Sharief on their own land but were prevented by some persons and manhandled which resulted in registration of counter FIRs.
The Court noted that since the quashment of FIR and the complaint pending in the trial court are concerned, it is profitable that before going to merits of the case, the question is as to whether the FIR/complaint pending before the Court can be quashed in petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr Pc.
“The answer has to be in the negative, for, the remedy while keeping in view of the scope of the petition,” the court said.
However, the court said that the trial court can be requested to expedite the trial after submission was made that trial court is not proceeding in the matter and delay itself is violating the rights of the petitioners.
“The trial court is expected to speed up the trial,” Justice Magrey noted.

NUSRAT SIDIQ