SUPPLEMENTARY LIST v. UT OF J AND K TH STATION HOUSE

Through: Mr. Jatinder Singh, Advocate Vs. UT OF J AND K TH STATION HOUSE OFFICER POLICE STATION KALAKOT RAJOURI Through: None CORAM: ...Respondent(s) HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE ORDER 17.11.2025 CrlM (1182/2025) in Bail App 185/2025

Nemo for respondent.

Petitioner claims that he has been falsely implicated, and in terms of order dated 11-07-2025, the accompanying petition (CrlM 1181/2025) a direction was passed that the respondent-Police agency may continue with investigation in FIR No. 0046/2025 dated 27-06- 2025, however, it shall not produce final report/challan in terms of Section 193 BNSS.

As per the status report filed in pursuance of the aforesaid order, FIR case under Section 64, 351(2) BNS stands registered against the petitioner upon the allegations of the complainant that when she had gone to the house of the petitioner for purchase of goats for being offered on some religious ceremony, she was subjected to forcible sexual assault and thereafter threatened of dire consequences and subsequently her statement under Section 183 BNSS stand recorded, so much so, victim has been examined for medico-legal purposes from GMC Rajouri and forensic report is awaited.

It was further provided in the status report that the complainant has not produced any witness acquainted with the facts of the case. On the other hand, petitioner claims prosecutrix/victim is in the habit of lodging false rape charges at the behest of one Muhammad Tufail S/o Muhammad Fazil, resident of Kalakote and after extracting monetary consideration, she gets the cases settled and in order to buttress this plea, the petitioner has placed reliance upon a resolution passed by the panchayat duly certified by the people of the vicinity that the prosecutrix is in the habit of lodging false and frivolous cases.

Be that as it may, since in terms of order dated 11-07-2025, filing of the charge-sheet has been kept subject to the permission of this Court and the investigation is underway, the petitioner rather than approaching the local Sessions Court has come to this Court by filing of the instant bail application; propriety demanded that he should have filed the application before the concerned Court instead of straightway jumping to this Court.

As per the objections filed to the application, the respondent claims that petitioner is absconding, if that is so, then it is quite apparent for the petitioner to knock the doors of the Trial Court. On being confronted with this aspect, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be granted liberty to avail the remedy of filing anticipatory bail application before the Sessions Court at Rajouri.

In view of the apprehension of arrest raised at Bar the Police agency shall not arrest the petitioner following the aforesaid order and petitioner is given interim protection from arrest till 24-11-2025 for availing the remedy. In case no such motion is laid, this direction shall stand over.

Bail application disposed of.

CRM(M) 611/2025 shall stand detached, to be listed separately for consideration on 22-12-2025, as per roster. (SANJAY PARIHAR) JUDGE SRINAGAR: 17.11.2025 Akhil Dev