Early Times Report
Jammu , June 29: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has granted interim pre-arrest bail to Firdous Ahmad in a case registered at Police Station Tangmarg under Sections 318(4) and 304(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Justice Mohd Yousuf Wani passed the order in Bail App No. 107/2026 after hearing the applicant’s plea filed under Section 482 of BNSS, corresponding to Section 438 CrPC, seeking protection from arrest in FIR No. 31/2026.
Appearing for the applicant, Advocate Naveed Bukhtiyar along with Advocate Abrar Hussain Khan submitted that the applicant had been falsely implicated on the basis of a motivated and belated complaint arising out of a pre-existing monetary and business relationship between the parties. It was argued that the dispute was essentially civil and financial in nature and had been given a criminal colour only to exert pressure upon the applicant.
The counsel further submitted that the allegations were based on documentary, electronic and banking records already in possession of the investigating agency and no recovery was required to be effected from the applicant. It was also contended that no material had been placed on record to show After considering the submissions, the Court observed that a ground appeared to be made out for grant of interim pre-arrest bail, subject to reasonable conditions. The Court also referred to the Supreme Court judgments in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs State of Maharashtra and Sushila Aggarwal vs State (NCT of Delhi) on the principles governing anticipatory bail and protection of personal liberty.
The applicant also pleaded that he had deep roots in society, no criminal antecedents, and was willing to cooperate with the investigation. It was further submitted that co-accused persons connected with the same allegations had already been granted bail, entitling him to the benefit of parity.
After considering the submissions, the Court observed that a ground appeared to be made out for grant of interim pre-arrest bail, subject to reasonable conditions. The Court also referred to the Supreme Court judgments in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs State of Maharashtra and Sushila Aggarwal vs State (NCT of Delhi) on the principles governing anticipatory bail and protection of personal liberty.
The Court directed SHO Police Station Tangmarg that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released from custody on furnishing surety and personal bonds of Rs 50,000 each.
The applicant has been directed not to threaten or influence witnesses, to cooperate with the Investigating Officer, remain punctual during trial, not leave India without prior permission, and not repeat any offence.
The matter has been listed for further consideration on July 22, 2026. (JNF) | 