Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2025 DAILYLAW 7311 (JK)

M/S REACH DREDGING LIMITED v. UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND ORS. (HOME)

CRM(M)/248/2025 · 2025-05-14

Sanjay Dhar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

103 Suppl HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CRM (M) No. 248/2025 CrlM No. 565/2025 M/s Reach Dredging Limited ….. Petitioner (s) Through: Mr. Mohammad Ashraf Malik, Adv. with Mr. Malik Fahd ul Haq and Mr. Salfi Azhar, Advocates. V/s Union Territory of J&K & Ors ….. Respondent(s) Through: Ms. Nadiya Abdullah, Adv. Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar, Judge ORDER 14.05.2025 1. The petitioner, through the medium of present petition, has sought a direction upon the respondents, to comply with the provisions contained under Section 35 of BNSS which relates to arrest without warrant, as also adherence to the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that, the petitioner has been falsely involved in case FIR No. 7/2025 for offences under Sections 5(1) (d) r/w 5(2) of J&K PC Act and P a g e | 2 CRM (M) No. 248/2025 CrlM No. 565/2025 Section 120-B of RPC and that the office bearers of the petitioner company are being unnecessarily harassed by the respondents/Investigating Agency without adopting due course of law and without following the relevant provisions of BNSS. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that, the petitioner would feel satisfied, if an appropriate direction is issued to the respondents/Investigating Agency so that the investigation is undertaken in accordance with law without causing any unnecessary harassment to the petitioner and its office bearers. 4. In view of the limited nature of the prayer sought in the present petition, the same can be disposed of at this stage by extending appropriate direction to the respondents. 5. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 2 and 3 to adhere to the provisions contained under Section 35 of BNSS and the guidelines issued by the Supreme court in Arnesh Kumar case (supra) while undertaking investigation of the aforesaid FIR. 6. Disposed of as above. (Sanjay Dhar) Judge SRINAGAR 14.05.2025 Aasif