Authority: High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar

Order Date: 12 August 2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: Petitioner/Appellant – Laiq Parvez, former General Manager (GM), District Industries Centre (DIC), Pulwama; Respondent – Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir represented by the Anti‑Corruption Bureau (ACB), South Kashmir.
  • Nature of Proceeding: Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No. 03/2020.
  • FIR Details: Registered on 7 July 2020 by ACB, South Kashmir for offences under Section 5(1)(d) and Section 5(2) of the Jammu & Kashmir Prevention of Corruption Act, 2006 and Section 120‑B of the Ranbir Penal Code.
  • Background: Laiq Parvez served as GM, DIC Pulwama from June 2017 to February 2018 and retired on 30 April 2019 as Programme Officer, ICDS, Kulgam. While GM he issued land‑allotment orders and executed lease deeds for various unit holders.
  • Allegations: A questionnaire dated 17 Oct 2019 (Verification No. 07/2018) alleged that Parvez conspired with unit holders for personal monetary gain, violating the Industrial Policy 2016 (Govt. Order 58‑IND 2016) and Procedural Guidelines 2017 (Govt. Order 129‑IND 2017). The complaint originated from Mukhtiyar Yousuf, President, Federation of Chambers of Industries, Kashmir, claiming DIC Pulwama had become a “hub of corruption”.
  • Petitioner’s Submissions: Asserted that under Clauses 2.12.1, 2.12.2 and 2.12.5 of the Industrial Policy 2016, the GM was competent to allot land and execute lease deeds for MSME units with investment up to ₹5 crore, and that no abuse of position or personal gain occurred. Argued lack of “reason to suspect” under Section 157 CrPC, constituting abuse of process and violation of Article 21 of the Constitution.
  • Respondent’s Position: Maintained that land‑allotment and lease‑deed execution were exclusive to SIDCO/SICOP after the transfer of industrial estates (order No. 48‑IND 2017 dated 3 March 2017, handed over on 20 April 2017). Cited departmental and expert committee findings of irregularities in ~62 units, including allotments without SWCC clearance, physical applications contrary to the online‑only mandate, and 48 allotments made after the estates were already with SICOP.
  • Investigation Status: Documents relating to 42 units sent for forensic scientific laboratory (FSL) examination; signatures matched petitioner’s; role of other officers under scrutiny.

Final Outcome

  • The Court held that the FIR was grounded on a formal verification, departmental and expert committee reports, and substantive evidence of alleged abuse of official position.
  • It concluded that the petition to quash the FIR was “bereft of merit” and that quashing at this stage would truncate an ongoing investigation involving the petitioner, beneficiaries, and corporation officers.
  • The petition is dismissed.
  • The case file (CD) is ordered to be returned to Mr. Mohsin Qadiri, Senior AAG, for onward transmission to the concerned police station.

Topics: Court Judgment, Corruption Investigation, Industrial Land Allotment