Udhampur Court slams frivolous religious complaint; orders Rs 49,000 compensation, sends complainant to 30 days jail

09/06/2026

Udhampur, Jun 8: In a strong and detailed set of orders, the Court of District Judicial Mobile Magistrate (T), Udhampur, presided over by Rishabh Koushal, has dismissed a criminal complaint filed by Sita Ram Dass against BishanDass and several other residents of Udhampur, holding the case to be frivolous, time-barred & devoid of any criminal offence.
The complaint, instituted on 18 March 2026 through Advocate Sanjeet Kumar Bavoria, alleged that the accused persons had violated Hindu religious practices during temple rituals and sought their prosecution under various provisions of the IPC and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The accused persons, including Bishan Dass and others, were represented by Advocate Yog Raj Sharma, who opposed the complaint at the stage of cognizance.
After hearing both sides, the Court observed that the allegations related to incidents of June 2017 and were clearly barred by limitation. The Court further found that even if the entire version of the complainant was accepted, no offence known to law was made out. The Court held that the dispute arose out of the complainant's personal interpretation of religious customs and a separate monetary grievance regarding alleged non-payment of salary, which was essentially civil in nature.
Emphasising that criminal law cannot be used to impose one individual's religious beliefs upon others in a diverse society, the Court dismissed the complaint at the threshold and discharged all the proposed accused persons.
Following dismissal of the complaint, the Court initiated proceedings under Section 273 BNSS against the complainant for instituting false and vexatious criminal proceedings. Upon consideration of the reply filed by Sita Ram Dass, the Court found the explanation to be vague and unsatisfactory. The Court held that the complaint had been filed without any reasonable cause and had subjected the accused persons to unnecessary litigation & harassment. Conseq-uently, the Court directed the complainant to pay compensation of Rs 7,000 each to seven contesting accused persons, amounting to a total of Rs 49,000, within two days.
When the matter was taken up on 5 June 2026 for compliance, the complainant failed to appear before the Court, although his counsel was present. Advocate Sanjeet Kumar Bavoria sought deferment of proceedings on the ground that a revision petition had been filed, but the Court rejected the request noting that no stay order had been produced. The Court recorded that the complainant had deliberately absconded to avoid compliance and had shown disregard for judicial proceedings.
In view of non-payment of compensation and continued absence, the Court ordered that the complainant would undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 30 days in default and issued a non-bailable warrant for his arrest. Pursuant to the warrant, the complainant was apprehended by the police and produced before the Court on 8 June 2026.
Upon being produced, the Court granted him an opportunity to deposit the compensation amount; however, he refused to comply. Consequently, the Court directed that Sita Ram Dass be sent to District Jail, Udhampur, to undergo simple imprisonment for 30 days, with a direction that he shall be released forthwith if he deposits Rs 49,000.
In its observations, the Court strongly criticised the misuse of criminal law as a pressure tactic in what was essentially a civil dispute. It noted that such frivolous litigation not only causes harassment to innocent persons but also wastes valuable judicial time and resources. The Court emphasised that abuse of the criminal justice system must be dealt with firmly to uphold the sanctity of law and deter similar conduct in future.

Photo Gallery

BSE Sensex

NSE Nifty