SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIGH COURT
Sanjay Dhar, J.
UT of J&K – Petitioners
versus
Bilal Ahmad Wani & Ors. – Respondent(s)
CrlA(AS) No.35/2024
Decided on 26.12.2025

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant: Mr. Ilyas Laway, GA
For the Respondent:Mr. Syed Sajad Geelani, Advocate

IMPORTANT POINT
Appeal against acquittal – A redundant criminal prosecution should not be protracted.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code,1860 – Sections 376-D, 509, 506, 120-B, 201 read with Section 67 of Information Technology Act, 2000 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 378 – Rape and circulation of obscene videography through WhatsApp – Appeal against acquittal – There was no material before trial court to even remotely connect respondents/accused with alleged crime – Prosecutrix has herself denied occurrence and has claimed that she has not been sexually assaulted by any of accused – She has further claimed that video which she has seen is fake – For proving offence under Section 67 of IT Act, it was incumbent upon prosecution to collect evidence during investigation of case to show that there has been publication or transmission in electronic form material which is lascivious – Protracting trial in face of facts and circumstances of present case would have been an empty formality as it was impossible to record conviction of accused/respondents even after examination of remaining witnesses of prosecution – Judgment of acquittal affirmed. (Paras14, 16, 17, 18 and 19)

Result: Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT

The appellant Union Territory of J&K through the medium of present appeal has assailed the judgment of acquittal dated 12.10.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Anantnag (“the trial court”), whereby the respondents/accused have been acquitted of the charges in a case arising out of FIR No.5/2020 for offences under Section 376-D, 509, 506, 120-B, 201 IPC and Section 67 of the I.T Act registered with Police Station, Larnoo.

2. Briefly stated, the facts leading to the filing of the present appeal are that on 29.04.2020, PW-1 (the prosecutrix) lodged a report with the police alleging therein that a few days back at about 11.00 am, while she was sitting at her home along with two minor children, accused Asif Ahamd and Bilal Ahmad Wani trespassed into her home whereafter they enticed her two minor children and brought them out of the home. Thereafter the afore-named two accused persons made the prosecutrix to take some intoxicating medicine with juice and cigarette, as a result of which she lost her senses. The afore-named two accused thereafter committed rape upon her. They also videographed the act and circulated the said video through WhatsApp, as a result of which the prosecutrix and her family faced a lot of indignation. It was also alleged that the afore-named two accused extended life threats to the prosecutrix in case she lodged the report with the police. It was further alleged in the report that accused Ilyas is also involved in this crime.

3. After registration of the FIR, investigation of the case was set into motion during which statements of the witnesses under Section 161/164 of the Cr. P. C were recorded. It was found that besides above named accused, other accused/respondents are also involved in the crime. On 19.07.2020, accused Bilal Ahmad was taken into custody and on the basis of his disclosure statement, one memory card and mobile phone along with invoice in respect of the said mobile phone were recovered and seized. The mobile phone and the memory card were sealed in presence of the Executive Magistrate and the same were sent to FSL, Srinagar, for analysis. After investigation of the case, offences under Section 376-D, 509, 506, 120-B, 201 of IPC and 67 IT Act were found established against the accused/respondents and the challan was laid before the trial court.

4. Vide order dated 25.02.2021, charges for offences under Section 376-D, 509, 506, 120-B IPC and 67 IT Act were framed against accused/respondent Bilal Ahmad whereas charges for offences under Section 376-D, 120-B, 509 IPC and 67 IT Act were framed against respondents/accused Sajad Ahmad Khatana, Nazakat Ali Khatana, Aamir Suhail Khatana, Mohammad Ilyas Khatan, Barkat Ali Khatana. The respondents/accused denied the charges and claimed to be tried. Accordingly, the prosecution was directed to lead evidence in support of the charges.

5. During trial of the case, the prosecution, besides examining PW-1, the prosecutrix, examined PW-2, Javaid Ahmad Khatana, PW-5 Nisar Ahmad ASI, PW-6 Head Constable Mohammad Akhter, PW-7 Reyaz Ahmad Shah and PW-8 Head Constable Mushtaq Ahmad, as witnesses in support of its case.

6. At this stage, it seems that the accused made an application for truncating the proceedings before the learned trial court. After hearing the parties and after considering the evidence on record and keeping in view the fact that the prosecutrix had turned hostile, the learned trial court allowed the application and proceeded to pass the impugned judgment dated 12.10.2023 thereby acquitting the accused. It seems that vide the impugned judgment, the learned trial court acquitted the accused of the charges under Section 376 of IPC only. There is no mention of other charges in the judgment dated 12.10.2023. Thereafter, on an application filed by the accused, the learned trial court exercised its powers under Section 362 of the Cr. P. C and passed another order on 24.04.2024 in which it was observed that the accused shall b

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top