Jammu and Kashmir High Court

Bail App/170/2026 of MOHD ABBAS Vs UT OF J AND K TH. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POLICE STATION, GOOL RAMBAN on 10 August 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

No. 170/2026 Page 1 of 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Bail App No. 170/2026 CrlM No. 1480/2026 Pronounced on : 10.08.2026 Uploaded on : 10.08.2026 Mohd. Abbas S/O Shakir Din Sheikh R/O Village Ashmar, Famrote Tehsil Gool District Ramban Jammu & Kashmir.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT JAMMU

Bail App No. 170/2026

CrlM No. 1480/2026

Pronounced on : 10.08.2026

Uploaded on : 10.08.2026

Mohd. Abbas

S/O Shakir Din Sheikh

R/O Village Ashmar, Famrote

Tehsil Gool District Ramban

Jammu & Kashmir.

….Petitioners

Through:-

Mr. Azmat Ullah Parihar, Adv.

V/S

UT of J&K through

SHO Police Station, Gool

District Ramban.

…..Respondents

Through:-

Mr. Eishaan Dadhichi, GA.

\

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M A CHOWDHARY, JUDGE

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

ORDER

10.08.2026

1. Petitioner has moved this application seeking grant of bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered vide FIR No. 34/2026 having been unsuccessful before the jurisdictional Sessions Court.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that initially the petitioner was granted bail by the Sessions Court in anticipation of his arrest vide order dated 27.06.2026, however, with the addition of an offence under Section 89 BNS, he again applied for the grant of bail in anticipation of his arrest, which had been declined by the Sessions Court vide order dated 29.07.2026.

3. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has mentioned that medical record does not support the commission of the offence punishable under section 89 BNS at the time of registration of the FIR, as such, the petitioner is entitled to be admitted to bail in anticipation of his arrest.

4. The offence under Section 89 BNS is with regard to causing miscarriage of a pregnant woman without her consent and is punishable with sentence of life imprisonment or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine.

5. Petitioner has been accused to have assaulted, along with other co-accused, applicant Manier Begum and one Shahnaz Begum during trespassing their land in the intervening night of 17th and 18th of June, 2026, making attempts of rape, outrage their modesty and in the process Shahnaz Begum suffered miscarriage of child in her womb, on being hit with fists and blows on her abdomen.

6. In view of the gravity of the offence and the serious allegations against the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is not entitled to

be admitted to bail in anticipation of his arrest and the court below has rightly held that he is not entitled to grant of bail in anticipation of his arrest.

7. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed, in limine.

(M A CHOWDHARY) JUDGE JAMMU

10.08.2026

Naresh/Secy.

Naresh Kumar 2026.08.10 18:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead