BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF J&K AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU.
Basharat Hussain & Ors
…Petitioners
VERSUS
U.T of J&K through PS Home & Ors
…Respondents
IN THE MATTER OF:- INDEX
S.No Particulars Page Fee
01 Objections on behalf of private
respondent No. 3 along with
affidavit.
02 Vakalatnama.
RESPONDENT NO 3
THROUGH COUNSEL
DATED:
PLACE: -
(ACHAL SHARMA)
ADVOCATE
BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF J&K AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU.
Basharat Hussain & Ors
…Petitioners
VERSUS
U.T of J&K through PS Home & Ors
…Respondents
IN THE MATTER OF: -
Objections on behalf of private
respondent no. 3 in the above title
petition filed u/s 482 of CrPC.
MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS;
PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS-
The answering private respondent no. 03 most respectfully
submits as under:-
1. That the present petition filed by
the petitioners is totally misconceived concocted and is
contrary to the facts as projected therein. On the sole
ground, the instant petition deserves to be dismissed.
2. That the petitioner has not
knocked the doors of this honble court with clean hands
and by misrepresenting the facts has got the interim order
on 11-01-2024 in the above mentioned petition filed u/s
482 CrPC.
3. That the petitioner has tried to
project the case that the FIR No. 180 of 2023 lodged with
Police Station Channi Himmat dated – 06-12-2023 due to
the personal rivalry of petitioners and respondents due to
the marriage of daughter of respondent No. 03 with Mohd
Tazeem S/o Mohd Shafi. The facts projected by the
petitioners are totally wrong and are without any footing.
It is pertinent to mention here that in the very outset of
the petition, at para 2(a) it has been stated that the
daughter of respondent no 3 has solemnized the marriage
with the nephew of the petitioner, the fact is that the son
in-law of the respondent no. 3 who is unfortunately no
more, because of tragic accident has no relation with the
petitioners as such. The story projected by the petitioner
is totally false and frivolous and has no relevance to
quash the FIR no. 180 of 2023.
4. That so far as the death of son
in-law of private respondent no. 3 is concerned, it has
been averted that the needle of suspicion is pointed
towards the private respondent no. 03 is also totally false
and frivolous. During investigation by the concerned
police official at Himachal Pradesh it has been found that
the cause of death of Mohd Tazeem S/o Mohd Shafi (son
in-law of respondent no. 3) is because of accident of JCB
machine and subsequent drowning. Closure report in this
regard is lying with the concerned Police Station Mendhar.
The petitioners are trying to project a case that because of
the so called rivalry, the FIR mentioned supra has been
lodged against them, same is totally false and frivolous.
On this ground the instant petition is required to be
dismissed.
5. That the FIR lodged in P/S
Channi Himmat Jammu bearing No. 180 of 2023 is u/s
500, 504, 505, 506 and 509 of the IPC 1860 is based
upon cogent and concrete evidences. It is apt to mention
here that the petitioner 1 and 2 has openly advanced
threats to the respondent no. 03 and has passed
slanderous allegations against the wife of respondent No.
03 and has also assassinated the character of wife of
respondent no 3 by sending and circulating the offensive
voice messages on whatsapp. The respondent no 3 has
concrete evidence in the shape of voice recordings
preserved by him to prove the allegations. That the
petitioners are so fearless that they have sent the voice
recordings without thinking for a while the repercussions
of such unwarranted, uncalled and unlawful act of their
part. The averments projected by the petitioners in the
instant petition that the FIR is false and frivolous is out-
rightly denied. On this score alone, the instant petition is
required to be dismissed with exemplary costs.
6. That the Honble Apex Court in
catena of judgments has time and again stated that
exercise of power under 482 CrPC shall be utilized with
great caution and care and can be exercised sparingly
only in the extreme and rare cases. In the instant case,
the petitioners have openly threatened the respondent no.
3, tarnished the image and assassinate the character of
wife of respondent no.. 3 by sending him voice
message/recordings and they have gone to the extent of
circulating the same across the town as already
mentioned above and has also threatened the entire
family members of respondent no 3. The respondent no 3
has concrete evidences with him, in the shape of audio to
prove the offences alleged against the petitioner 1 and 2
beyond any shadow of doubt. On this score alone, the
instant petition is required to be dismissed.
7. That the petitioner has
committed cognizable offence which are of serious in
nature and required to be investigated so as to book the
culprits under the law. On this score alone, present
petition deserves to be dismissed with costs.
8. That the FIR lodged with Police
Station Mendhar bearing No. 218 of 2023 is based upon
different facts and circumstances and same has been
lodged by the wife of respondent no. 03 whereas the FIR
lodged in by the respondent no 03 is based upon the
threats advanced by the petitioner No. 01 and 02 by way
of voice messages are based upon different facts, both the
FIRs have no remote connection. On this score alone the
instant petition is required to be dismissed.
Without prejudice to the foregoing preliminary
objections, para-wise reply is submitted as under -
1. In reply to the contents of para a,
it is submitted that the petitioners have alleged that
deceased Mohd Tazeem S/o Mohd Shafi was their nephew,
same is totally false and wrong, late Tazeem was having no
close relation with the petitioners and the respondent no 3
has never at any point of time had ever interfered with the
peaceful marital life of his daughter. Rest of content of para
with regard to the filing of protection petition bearing no.
2097 of 2021 is a matter of record hence needs no reply.
2. In reply to the contents of para b,
it is submitted that the inquest proceedings were initiated
with regard to the death of son in-law of respondent no. 3
by the concerned police officials having jurisdiction and in
the closure report the respondent no. 3 has come to know
from the concerned police officials that the death of the son
in-law of respondent no. 3 was caused due to the accident
of JCB Machine and subsequently drowning in the state of
Himachal Pradesh where he was working for his livelihood
at relevant point of time. Rest of the contents of para are
totally false and hence denied.
3. In reply to the contents of para c,
it is submitted that the respondent has never ever
pressurized her daughter or any other person at any point
of time. The allegations leveled in the said paras are totally
false and frivolous, hence denied.
4. In reply to the contents of para d,
it is submitted that the threats against the wife of the
complainant was advanced by the accused persons that
they would kill the wife as well as the entire family of
respondent no 3. They have also tried to outrage her
modesty. Despite of lodging the said FIR at Poonch, the
petitioners have not restrained themselves to advance the
threats rather they became more berserk and this time
they have advanced the threats openly without an fear and
respect of law and without thinking for a while the
repercussions of advancing the threats through Whatsapp
by way of voice messages and also circulating the same in
the entire area where they have uttered levied remarks
against the wife of respondent no. 3 as well as against the
respondent no. 03 and they have also threatened them for
dire consequences. The respondent no. 3 has preserved the
voice messages to prove the assertions. Pen-drive of the
voice messages sent to respondent No. 03 shall be
produced as and when this court requires demonstrating
the fact that obscene, levied and outrageous remarks were
against the family members of respondent no. 3.
5. In reply to the contents of para e,
it is submitted that the respondent no. 3 is permanently
residing in Jammu and as such the respondent no. 3 has
every right conferred under law to lodge the FIR here at
Jammu in the Police station having the jurisdiction. It is
most respectfully submitted that the respondent no 3 has
prima facie strong evidences with him to prove the
allegations against the culprits herein petitioners at the
time of investigation.
PARAWISE REPLY TO THE GROUNDS.
a) In reply to the contents of para a of the instant
petition, it is most humbly submitted that the FIR No.
180 of 2023 lodged against the petitioners is based
upon cogent facts and the respondent no. 3 has
substantial evidences preserved by him to prove the
allegations leveled against the petitioners beyond the
shadows of reasonable doubt.
b) That the contents of para b are totally false hence
denied. It is relent to mention here that the death of
the son in-law of the respondent no. 3 has been
caused due to the ill fate accident of JCB and
subsequently drowning, same is already mentioned
supra.
c) That the contents of para c are wrong and hence
denied. It is submitted that both the FIRs are based
upon different set of allegations and the instant FIR
bearing no. 180 of 2023 lodged with Police Station,
Channi Himmat Jammu U/s 400, 500, 504, 505, 506,
509 and 109 IPC the veracity of which has been
challenged before this Honble Court. It is most humbly
submitted that the said FIR is based upon cogent
evidences which has been preserved by the respondent
no. 03 prima facie proves the allegations leveled
against the petitioners are true and authentic without
any iota of doubt.
d) That the contents of para d are totally false hence
denied. The complaint which is based upon cogent
evidences established without any iota of doubt that
the petitioners have committed the cognizable offences,
the section 509 IPC is cognizable in nature.
e) In reply to the contents of para e, it is submitted that
both the FIRs are based upon different facts and have
different set of allegations as such there is no question
of concealment of earlier FIR which is not challenged
by the petitioners. Moreover there is no bar under law
that multiple FIRs cannot be lodged for different cause
of action. The respondent no. 3 has every right to take
action against the petitioners for advancing the threats
and passing the levied and derogatory remarks against
her wife and to prove this aspect the respondent no. 3
prima facie strong evidences with him.
f) That in reply to the contents of para f, it is most
humbly submitted that the offences committed by the
petitioners are very serious in nature and are required
to be investigated so as to punish the culprits as per
the mandate of law as they have openly challenged the
modesty of a women by passing such levied remarks
and circulating the same in the society causing a
havoc in the peaceful marital life of respondent no 3.
4) That the contents of para 4, need no reply.
5) That the contents of para 5 is a matter of record hence
need no reply.
IN THE PREMISES
It is most humbly prayed that keeping in view the above
mentioned facts and circumstances, the instant petition is
devoid of any merit deserves outright dismissal with exemplary
costs to prevent the miscarriage of justice.
RESPONDENT NO 3
THROUGH COUNSEL
Dated:
Place:
ACHAL SHARMA
ADVOCATE
BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF J&K AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU.
Basharat Hussain & Ors
…Petitioners
Versus
U.T of J&K through PS Home & Ors
…Respondents
IN THE MATTER OF: - AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF
OBJECTIONS.
I, Mohd Irshad, (Age 53 Years) S/o Mohd Bashir R/o
Pathanateer, Tehsil Mandi, District Poonch, do hereby
solemnly affirm and declare as under -
1. That the accompanying reply/objections has been read over
and explained to me and the contents of the para No.____ to
____ of the reply are true and correct as per my knowledge
and those of para No.____ are true as per information
received from record and those of remaining paras ____ to
____ are bases on legal advice.
2. The deponent is the respondent No.3 in the above titled
petition, he is well versed with the facts and circumstances
of the case, and hence he is competent to swear the instant
affidavit.
I solemnly swear/affirm that the affidavit is true, no part
of this is false and nothing has been concealed.
Place:
Dated:
DEPONENT
