Serial No. 19 REGULAR CAUSE LIST IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CRM(M) 132/2024 MUDASIR AHMAD RESHI …Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Sheikh Manzoor, Advocate with Mr. Shabir Ah. Shah, Advocate Vs. SHO POLICE STATION SOPORE AND ORS. ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Hakim Aman Ali, Dy AG CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE ORDER 22.05.2026 1. Earlier, the petitioner had been granted interim bail by this Court vide order dated 03.04.2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire case set up against the petitioner is false and fabricated, inasmuch as respondent No. 3 had throughout been in a consensual relationship with the petitioner. It is contended that the relationship subsequently turned sour for one reason or another, whereafter the respondent misused the same to falsely implicate the petitioner in offences under Sections 376 and 506 RPC. It is further argued that the prosecution case is inherently weak and the chances of conviction are bleak, therefore, the proceedings deserve to be quashed. 2. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the charge-sheet already stands filed and the petitioner is presently facing trial. It is further submitted that even the victim has been examined before the Trial Court. In such circumstances, it cannot be presumed at this stage that the statement made by the complainant under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before the learned Judicial Magistrate is imaginary or false. According to the respondents, the petitioner has ample opportunity during trial to contest the prosecution case and establish his innocence by effectively cross-examining the victim and other prosecution witnesses. It is thus argued that once the FIR has culminated into investigation and filing of the charge-sheet, and particularly when the investigation process itself has not been challenged, it would be wholly premature for this Court to exercise its inherent jurisdiction for quashing the proceedings in a matter involving serious allegations of such heinous nature. 3. Be that as it may, having regard to the nature of accusations levelled against the petitioner, coupled with the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed and the petitioner is facing trial, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the present petition pending. 4. This Court does not find any sufficient or justifiable ground warranting exercise of inherent powers for quashing of the proceedings. 5. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. However, since the petitioner has already been admitted to interim bail in terms of order dated 03.04.2024, the said interim bail is made absolute, subject to the conditions already imposed therein. The petitioner shall remain present before the Trial Court on each and every date of hearing unless exempted in accordance with law. 6. A copy of this order be transmitted to the learned Trial Court for information and compliance. (SANJAY PARIHAR) JUDGE SRINAGAR: 22.05.2026 “S.Nuzhat”