Ref Crl No.03/2026 1 | P a g e S. No.231 Suppl. list ,,,HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR Ref(Crl) No.03/2026 Mohammad Khalil Badan V/s Mohammad Amin Bhat CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE ORDER 29.04.2026 1. Instant reference has been made by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Uri (hereinafter the trial Magistrate) seeking initiation of appropriate proceedings against Sr. Superintendent of Police, Srinagar. 2. I have gone through the record of reference. It appears that non-bailable warrants were issued by the learned trial Magistrate against the accused namely Mohammad Amin Bhat S/o Ghulam Rasool Bhat R/o Ishber, Nishat Srinagar in a complaint filed by one Mohammad Khalil Badan against him under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. When the process could not be served upon the accused, the learned trial Court issued warrants of arrest against him. Even the warrants of arrest could not be Ref Crl No.03/2026 2 | P a g e executed. Ultimately, the report was received by the trial Court that the accused has left the place of his residence in the year 2008 and his whereabouts are not known. 3. The learned trial Magistrate feeling dissatisfied with the manner in which the police has proceeded to execute warrants of arrest against the accused, framed Rule against SSP Srinagar and issued notice to him asking him as to why strictures be not passed against him for failing to locate the accused. 4. In answer to the show cause notice, the SSP Srinagar submitted his reply. In his reply to the show cause notice, the SSP submitted that non bailable warrants issued by the trial Magistrate on 22.11.2025 were received on 26.11.2025, as such, the same could not be executed and vide communication dated 27.11.2025 a request was made for issuance of fresh non- bailable warrants for the next date of hearing. It has been further submitted by the SSP that on 27.11.2025, fresh non-bailable warrants were issued by the learned trial Magistrate with a direction to produce the accused on or before 23.12.2025. It has been submitted that the warrants were forwarded to SHO Police Station Nishat, Srinagar vide communication dated 16.12.2025 of SSP Srinagar. It has been submitted that vide report dated 10.03.2026, SHO Police Station, Nishat has reported that the accused has sold the entire property and he has shifted to some Ref Crl No.03/2026 3 | P a g e unknown place and that his whereabouts were not known. It was submitted that a proclamation was issued by the City Judge/JMIC Srinagar on 05.02.2026 and the accused has been declared as proclaimed offender. A copy of the proclamation order issued by the City Judge/JMIC Srinagar was also furnished alongwith the report. 5. The SSP has further submitted in his reply to the show cause notice that proclamation order was circulated to adjoining areas and it was placed at the conspicuous area where the accused was residing. It has also been submitted that attempts were made to contact the accused on his cell phone No.8383079748 several times but no response was received from the user. It has been submitted that the technical assistance is being put in place to effect the arrest of accused by any possible means. Lastly, the SSP in his reply to show cause notice has submitted that he has highest regard for the Court and he cannot imagine of any violation in any manner whatsoever. 6. The learned trial Magistrate feeling dissatisfied with the reply to the show cause notice submitted by SSP Srinagar has made the instant reference for initiating appropriate proceedings against the SSP. 7. A bare perusal of the reply to the show cause notice filed by the SSP leaves no manner of doubt that the officer has made all Ref Crl No.03/2026 4 | P a g e out efforts to locate and apprehend the accused, but despite his best efforts he could not locate him because the accused has left to some unknown destination after disposing of his property at Ishbar Nishat, where he was last residing. The SSP has also brought to the notice of learned trial Magistrate that the accused has already been declared as proclaimed offender by another Court, which strengthens his submission that apprehension of the accused in near future may not be possible. The officer has also submitted that the accused could not be contacted on his cell phone which was recorded in the warrants of arrest issued by learned trial Magistrate. He has, however, assured the trial Magistrate that technical assistance is being put in place to arrest the accused by any possible means. 8. Thus, it is not a case where there has been any lack of effort or there has been any negligence on part of Police Agency for execution of warrants of arrest upon accused. In fact, the police has made all out efforts and used all means at their own level to trace out the accused, but these efforts have not borne any fruit so far. Therefore, it cannot be stated that the SSP Srinagar has committed any willful default in adhering to the directions of the trial Magistrate. 9. The observation of the trial Magistrate that Police Agency is making excuses for not executing warrants of arrest is wholly Ref Crl No.03/2026 5 | P a g e misconceived and contrary to the material on record. The learned trial Magistrate instead of taking resort to the measures available under Part C of Chapter VI of BNSS, which relates to ‘Proclamation and Attachment’, has sought to proceed against SSP Srinagar without there being any basis for the same. The learned trial Magistrate would do well to concentrate his energy on proceeding in the mater in terms of provisions contained in part C of Chapter VI of the BNSS. 10. For the foregoing reasons, I do not find any ground to proceed against the SSP Srinagar. Reference is accordingly returned with a direction that proceedings against the SSP be dropped. (SANJAY DHAR) JUDGE SRINAGAR 29.04.2026 Sarveeda Nissar 1. Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No Sarveeda Nissar I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document every page at bottom left side 04.05.2026 15:09