Sakina Kousar And Others vs Union Territory Of Jammu And
2026 Latest Caselaw 1047 J&K

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Sakina Kousar And Others vs Union Territory Of Jammu And on 20 February, 2026

                                                           Serial No. 25
                                                          REGULAR LIST

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                     AT JAMMU

                         CRM(M) 343/2020
                         CrlM(1257/2020)

SAKINA KOUSAR AND OTHERS.                    ...Petitioner/Appellant(s)

Through:   None

                                  Vs.

UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU AND                           ...Respondent(s)
KASHMIR TH SHO POLICE STATION
MENDHAR POONCH AND ANOTHER.
Through: None

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE
                               ORDER

20.02.2026

1. None appeared for the petitioners.

2. A status report has been filed by Mr. Adarsh Bhagat, learned

Government Advocate appearing for respondent No. 1, a perusal

whereof reveals that upon investigation and keeping in view the facts

and circumstances of the case, offences under Sections 420/109 IPC

were not found to be proved against the alleged accused persons.

Consequently, the names of the alleged accused persons and the

aforesaid offences have been deleted and the investigation of the case

stands closed as "not admitted" vide order dated 09.06.2021.

3. As per the FIR, the petitioners were accused of having made a false

report regarding landed property comprising Khasra Nos. 23, 26 and

27, which the complainant claimed to be in his possession. It was

alleged that on the basis of fabricated documents, the petitioners sought compensation on the ground that the said land had come under

the PMGSY road and that the said documents were prepared by

bribing revenue officials.

4. However, in view of the status report submitted by the SHO, Police

Station Mendhar, no case has been found to be made out against the

petitioners. Since the investigation has culminated in closure of the

case as not admitted, the closure report is required to be placed before

the competent Trial Court, which shall proceed in accordance with

law.

5. In view of the above, the present petition has been rendered

infructuous and, is, accordingly disposed of in the light of the closure

report.

6. Interim directions, if any, shall stand vacated.

(SANJAY PARIHAR) JUDGE

JAMMU:

20.02.2026 Akhil Dev