Jammu, July 09: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has ruled that a Magistrate cannot reject a police closure report or order further investigation through a cryptic and unreasoned order, holding that such an approach is legally unsustainable and contrary to established judicial principles.
The observation was made by Justice M. A. Chowdhary while allowing a petition challenging an order passed by the Special Mobile Magistrate, Poonch, who had rejected a Final Closure Report submitted by police in an FIR registered at Police Station Poonch and directed further investigation into the matter.
The High Court noted that the Magistrate had failed to assign any reasons while rejecting the closure report and ordering a fresh investigation. It observed that the impugned order was passed in a cryptic manner without examining the material collected during the police investigation or explaining why the closure report was not acceptable.
The Court emphasized that whenever a Magistrate disagrees with the findings of the investigating agency, it is mandatory to carefully evaluate the evidence collected during investigation and record specific reasons. Such reasons should clearly indicate whether the available material discloses the commission of an offence, whether any crucial evidence remained uncollected, or whether the investigation suffered from any legal or procedural defects.
The High Court further observed that the complainant had alleged manipulation of witness statements by the Investigating Officer. However, the Magistrate neither examined the allegation nor recorded any finding on the issue before directing further investigation.
The Court held that in such circumstances, the Magistrate should have summoned the concerned witnesses and confronted them with their recorded statements to determine whether the statements had actually been tampered with or incorrectly recorded during investigation.
Expressing concern over the manner in which the order was passed, the High Court observed that the protest petition had been allowed without assigning any reasons, much less legally sustainable reasons, rendering the order unsustainable in law.
“It is recorded with great regret that the impugned order has been passed without any reason whatsoever, which renders the same liable to be set aside,” the Court observed.
Accordingly, the High Court set aside the order of the Special Mobile Magistrate, Poonch, and remanded the matter back to the Magistrate for fresh consideration. The Court directed that a reasoned order be passed strictly in accordance with law after providing both parties a fair opportunity of being heard. (KNC)
