Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2018 DAILYLAW 1072 (JK)

BINDU BHARTI v. DINA NATH AND ORS.

CRMC/163/2018 · 2026-02-20

Rajnesh Oswal

body2018

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CRMC No. 163/2018 IA No. 1/2018 Bindu Bharti …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Atul Verma, Advocate. vs Dina Nath and others .…. Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Eishaan Dadhichi, GA vice Mr. Sumeet Bhatia, GA. Mr. Sachin Sharma, Advocate. Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE ORDER 20.02.2026 1. Mr. Atul Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner/complainant has submitted that the petitioner is mainly aggrieved of order of discharge regarding offences under Sections 376 and 341 RPC qua the respondent No. 1 and the petitioner has no grievance so far as the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are concerned. He further submits that in a number of cases, the respondent No. 1 has been proceeded under Section 512 Cr.PC. (335 of BNSS), as such, the present petition be adjourned sine die with liberty to the petitioner to lay appropriate motion for consideration of the petition on merits, as and when the respondent No. 1 is apprehended pursuant to the general warrants of arrest/surrenders before the Court. 2. Mr. Eishaan Dadhichi, learned GA appearing vice Mr. Sumeet Bhatia, learned GA for respondent No. 1 and Mr. Sachin Sharma, learned Serial No. 122 2 CRMC No. 163/2018 counsel representing the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are not averse to the submissions made by Mr. Atul Verma. 3. Accordingly, the present petition is adjourned sine die with liberty to the petitioner as prayed for. 4. Disposed of along with the connected application. (RAJNESH OSWAL) JUDGE Jammu 20.02.2026 Sahil Padha Sahil Padha 2026.02.20 16:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document