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

2025 Supreme(Online)(J&K) 1442

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
Manjeet Singh Manhas, J
UT Of J&K Through CBI – Appellant
Versus
Aijaz Ahmad Naik – Respondent
RC-048202550008 of CBI



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Zahoor Malik, Sr. Adv. Sunil Sethi, Adv. Ashraf Malik, Adv. Ahrar Dar
For the Respondents: [None listed]

The court ruled that absence of concrete evidence linking accused to custodial torture along with no substantial change in circumstances justified denial of bail applications.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 120-B, 323, 325, 330, 331, 343 - Application for bail by police personnel accused of custodial torture - Case stems from allegations of illegal detention and torture of a police constable - Credibility of complainant’s allegations questioned due to lack of specific roles attributed to accused - Most serious charges dropped post-investigation, raising arguments for bail - The court found no substantial change in circumstances justifying bail grant and dismissed applications. (Paras 8.1, 10, 16, 19)

(B) Bail - Principles governing bail applications - Burden of proving change in circumstances falls upon the applicant - Mere allegations and uncorroborated testimony insufficient for bail consideration. (Para 17)

Table of Content
1. allegations of illegal detention and torture require substantial evidence. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. legal claims of change in circumstances need solid support. (Para 6 , 8 , 9 , 10)
3. the court cannot decide complex matters prematurely. (Para 12 , 14)
4. the absence of substantial change leads to denial of bail. (Para 19)
5. bail applications dismissed considering insufficient merits. (Para 20)

ORDER

1. By virtue of this combined order, I propose to dispose off two bail applications, one filed by Accused No.1 and another filed by Accused Persons No. 2 to 8.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE

2. The present case emanates from FIR No. RC-048202550008 dated 26.07.2025, registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation pursuant to directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in SLP (Criminal) Nos. 13751-13752 of 2023. The case concerns the alleged illegal detention, wrongful confinement, and custodial torture of Police Constable Khursheed Ahmed Chowhan at the Joint Interrogation Centre (JIC), Kupwara, during the period from 20.02.2023 to 26.02.2023. The complainant, Smt. Rubeena Akhter, wife of the victim, approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court alleging that her husband was subjected to brutal custodial torture by police personnel at JIC Kupwara under the pretext of investigating narcotics-related offences. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, taking cognizance of these serious allegations involving breach of fundamental rights and custodial violence, directed the CBI to register an FIR and conduct a thorough investigation into the matter.

3. The investigation conducted by Inspector Subhash Chander Kundu revealed that Khursheed Ahmed Chowhan was initially detained on suspicion of involvement in narcotics smuggling and was brought to JIC Kupwara for interrogation. During his detention from 20.02.2023 to 26.02.2023, it is alleged that the accused police personnel, in criminal conspiracy, subjected him to physical torture to extract confessions regarding narcotic smuggling activities. The chargesheet filed on 22.10.2025 implicates eight police personnel, including Dy. SP Aijaz Ahmad (A-1), SI Reyaz Ahmad Mir (A-2), SPO Jahangeer Ahmad Beigh (A-3), Head Constable Mohd Younis Khan (A-4), Sergeant Constable Shakir Ahmed (A-5), Head Constable Tanveer Ahmad Malla (A-6), Sergeant Constable Altaf Hussain Bhat (A-7), and Constable Shahnawaz Ahmad Deedad (A-8), all attached to JIC Kupwara. The charges under the chargesheet include Sections 120-B (criminal conspiracy), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 325 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt), 330 (voluntarily causing hurt to extort confession), 331 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt to extort confession), and 343 (wrongful confinement) of the Indian Penal Code .

4. The investigation gathered substantial evidence including oral testimony from the victim Khursheed Ahmed Chowhan and his family members, documentary evidence in the form of medical reports, CCTV footage from JIC Kupwara dated 26.02.2023, and forensic evidence analyzed by the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL), Chandigarh. The medical examination conducted on Khursheed Ahmed Chowhan revealed injuries consistent with physical assault, particularly non-genital injuries on the buttocks and thighs, which medical experts opined were indicative of custodial torture. The CFSL analysis confirmed DNA matches of biological samples with the victim, corroborating the allegations of physical assault. CCTV footage from the interrogation center showed the victim's movements within the facility and his condition during detention, with footage specifically from 26.02.2023 showing him limping, which supports the allegations of physical abuse. The investigation also examined mobile phones and electronic devices seized during the inquiry, though NETRA Lab analysis revealed no significant digital evidence linking the devices to the alleged crimes.

5. Significantly, the investigation revealed that one Imtiyaz Ahmad, who was initially suspected to be involved in th

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