J&K&L High Court Quashes Case Against Man Booked For Participating In Protest During COVID, Says Officers Intended To 'Harrass' Accused

Update: 2025-08-11 12:23 GMT
Click the Play button to listen to article
story

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court quashed criminal proceedings against three persons who were booked during the COVID-19 pandemic for allegedly violating prohibitory orders, holding that the case appeared to have been registered frivolously to harass them.A bench of Justice M.A. Chowdhary observed that the FIR under Sections 188/34 IPC and Section 51 of the Disaster Management Act appeared to...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court quashed criminal proceedings against three persons who were booked during the COVID-19 pandemic for allegedly violating prohibitory orders, holding that the case appeared to have been registered frivolously to harass them.

A bench of Justice M.A. Chowdhary observed that the FIR under Sections 188/34 IPC and Section 51 of the Disaster Management Act appeared to be a reaction to the petitioners' protest against the district administration, rather than a genuine violation of the order issued under Section 144 CrPC.

The case arose from an order dated May 16, 2021, issued by the District Magistrate, Ramban, restricting public movement as a precaution against the spread of COVID-19.

While the respondents alleged that the petitioners had violated this order, the Court noted that the chargesheet did not clarify the reason for the protest and that only three persons were involved, below the minimum number of five required to constitute an “unlawful assembly” under the law.

“It appears that the FIR came to be registered… frivolously, as the officers felt offended of their protest against them, with an aim to harass them. Viewed thus, trial… would be an abuse of the process of the court,” the Court said, adding that several States had withdrawn such pandemic-era cases after the epidemic was over.

Allowing the plea, the Court quashed the charge-sheet pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Gool, and ordered that any bail or personal bonds executed by the petitioners stand discharged.

APPEARANCE:

Case-Title: Sher Mohd. and another vs UT of J&K, 2025

Nadim Bhat, Advocate for petitioner

Eishaan Dadhichi, GA. for Respondent

Click Here To Read/Download Order

Full View
Tags:    

Similar News