Jammu and Kashmir High Court
CRM(M)/716/2026 of RAFIQ HASSAN SHAH Vs JAVID HUSSAIN BHAT on 7 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CRM(M) 716/2026 CrlM(1625/2026) RAFIQ HASSAN SHAH ….. Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Firdous Ahmad Advocate. JAVID HUSSAIN BHAT .. Respondent(s) Through: Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajnesh Oswal, Judge ORDER 07.09.2026 1.
22
Regular
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
CRM(M) 716/2026 CrlM(1625/2026)
RAFIQ HASSAN SHAH
….. Petitioner(s)
Through:
Mr. Firdous Ahmad Advocate.
JAVID HUSSAIN BHAT
.. Respondent(s)
Through:
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajnesh Oswal, Judge
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
07.09.2026
1. The petitioner has impugned order dated 09.07.2026 whereby process has been issued against the petitioner by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Pattan (hereinafter referred to as the trial court) in a complaint filed by the respondent for commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the trial court has not followed the provisions contained under Section 225 of the BNSS and further without properly serving the petitioner, warrant of arrest has been issued against him. Admittedly the petitioner is a resident of District Kulgam whereas the process in terms of the order impugned has been issued by the court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Pattan.
P a g e | 2 CRM(M) 716/2026 CrlM(1625/2026)
3. As per judgment of the Supreme Court in case reported in Re (2021) 16 SCC 116, the process issued against the petitioner for commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act cannot be quashed on the ground that no inquiry under Section 202 of Cr.PC was conducted against the accused residing outside the territorial jurisdiction of the concerned Court.
4. At this stage learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would cause appearance before the learned trial court on next date of hearing and till then warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner be stayed.
5. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of by directing the petitioner to approach before the learned trial court on the date fixed and till then the warrant of arrest issued against him shall remain in abeyance. In the event the petitioner does not cause appearance before the learned trial court on the date fixed, the learned trial court shall proceed in accordance with law.
6. Disposed of as above.
(Rajnesh Oswal)
Judge
SRINAGAR 07.09.2026 Aasif