STATE TIMES NEWS
JAMMU: Justice Rajnesh Oswal of Jammu & Kashmir High Court dismissed petition filed by one Dalip Singh seeking quashment of proceedings before the CBI Court in fake arm license scam.The brief facts of the case are that on the basis of a communication received from Special Cell, Delhi Police dated 10.09.1998, FIR No. 8/1999 was registered by the Crime Branch, Jammu against unknown persons on 06.07.1999 with regard to the issuance of large number of fake arms licenses to the non residents of District Jammu between the years 1994 to 1998 from the office of the District Magistrate/Additional District Magistrate, Jammu. Subsequently, vide notification dated 27.12.2001, the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension (DP&T), Government of India, New Delhi with the consent of Government of Jammu and Kashmir conveyed through notification vide SRO 467 dated 10.12.2001, investigation in FIR bearing No. 8/1999 of Police Station, Crime Branch, Jammu was entrusted to the Central Bureau of Investigation, respondent herein for further investigation and the case was re-registered as RC-7(S)/2002/SIU-I/CBI/SCR-1, New Delhi. During the course of investigation, 20 arms licenses were investigated by the respondent. Three Arms licenses bearing Nos. 55/JDM/95 in the name of Ajit Singh, No. 56/JDM/95 in the name of Manjodh Singh and No. 64/JDM/95 in the name of Feroze Khan form the subject matter of the charge sheet No. 11 dated 21.10.2011 whereas two Arms license No. 366/JDM/96 in the name of Bahadhur Singh and No. 511/JDM/96 in the name of Joginder Singh form the subject matter of charge sheet bearing No. 16 dated 21.10.2021. In charge sheet No. 16, the learned Special Judge Anti Corruption, (CBI Cases), J&K, Jammu (hereinafter to be referred as the trial court) vide order dated 19.07.2013 framed the charges against the petitioner along with others for commission of offences under sections 120-B read with 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 of RPC and 5(1)(d) read with 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act Samvat 2006 and section 30 of the Arms Act. Similarly in charge sheet No. 11, the learned trial court vide order dated 30.05.2013, has framed the charges against the petitioner and other accused for commission of offences under sections 120-B read with 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 of RPC and 5(1)(d) read with 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act Samvat 2006 and section 30 of the Arms Act.The petitioner in both the petitions challenged the criminal proceedings as also the orders dated 30.05.2013 and 19.07.2013 passed by the trial court by virtue of which the charges for commission of offences mentioned above have been framed against the petitioner along with others.Justice Rajnesh Oswal after hearing both the sides observed that in the instant case, the mode and manner in which the arms licenses have been issued on the basis of fake, false and forged documents to the persons, who have never been the residents of the Jammu District, itself suggests that the accused persons have acted in tandem with each other. The false and forged documents have been relied upon for the purpose of issuance of arms licenses. The persons to whom the licenses have been allegedly issued have categorically stated that they never resided at the place mentioned in the record pertaining to issuance of arms license. An attempt was made by the learned senior counsel to persuade this Court that it was Surjit Singh Rana, who was under obligation to verify that the procedural formalities were complied with by the applicants and the petitioner had no role in the same. The argument deserves to be rejected for the simple reason that the petitioner was the issuing authority of arms license being the Additional District Magistrate and was not supposed to act as rubber stamp only. The petitioner cannot be absolved of his wrongdoings those have been narrated in details as above. So this contention too lacks any force and other contention raised by the petitioner is that the petitioner cannot be prosecuted for commission of offence of forgery as the original licenses allegedly issued in favour of the licensees have not been seized. It requires to be noted that it is not the case of the prosecution that forged licenses have been issued, rather it is the positive case of the prosecution that these arms licenses were issued on the basis of false and forged as well as bogus documents including bogus police verification report. All the licensees have admitted that they were handed over the licenses in which their respective residential addresses were shown to be at Jammu, where they never resided at all. As such, this contention of the petitioner too fails.Justice Rajnesh oswal observed that this Court had gone through the order impugned passed by the trial court and the perusal of the same reveals that the learned trial court has passed the order impugned well within the parameters of law laid down by Apex Court as such there is no illegality in the order impugned and dismissed the petition.
Indian Legal Lottery Operator Competing for Top British Contract
Ladakh reports 33 new Covid cases
Anti-inflammation drug may effectively treat COVID-19 complications in children: Study
Apple previews new software for iPhone, other gadgets
Petrol price up by Rs 36 a litre, diesel Rs 26.58 in less than 18 months
Petrol, diesel prices hiked again; diesel above Rs 99/litre from Srinagar to Chennai
Gold gains marginally; silver jumps Rs 198
Petrol, diesel prices hiked again
Rupee surges 26 paise against US dollar in early trade
Download 10Cric Casino app, and enjoy Indias most popular casino games, directly on your mobile!
Gamble with real money online! Play Indias favourite casino games at 7Jackpots.com, Indias most trusted online casino site.
© 2020 State Times Daily Newspaper | Powered by Ideogram Technology Solutions [P] Ltd.