HC orders retrial in 2005 attempt-to-murder case, flags serious lapses in trial proceedings

10/11/2026

JAMMU, Nov 9: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has directed reopening of a nearly two-decade-old attempt-to-murder case, expressing serious concern over the failure to examine crucial witnesses during a trial that continued for seven-and-a-half years.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Yash Paul Bourney, while exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 561-A of the erstwhile J&K Code of Criminal Procedure, directed that the case be remanded for fresh trial in accordance with law, preferably within six months of receipt of the order.
The case relates to an alleged murderous assault on September 17, 2005, in the Paloura area of Jammu, where Sohan Singh alias Sonu was allegedly attacked with sharp-edged weapons and sticks over a land dispute.
Following the incident, FIR No. 94/2005 was registered at Police Station Janipur under Sections 307, 326, 147, 148, 149 and 34 of the Ranbir Penal Code and Sections 4/25 of the Indian Arms Act.
The accused were acquitted by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu, on July 26, 2016. Subsequently, Dalbeer Singh, one of the injured persons, approached the High Court seeking special leave to appeal against the acquittal.
The Division Bench held that the petitioner had no statutory right to maintain such an appeal under the applicable provisions of the erstwhile State Code, as the case originated from a police chargesheet and not a private complaint.
However, upon examining the trial record, the court noticed serious deficiencies in the conduct of the proceedings. It observed that despite numerous opportunities over seven-and-a-half years, the prosecution had examined only three witnesses, including an injured witness whose examination remained incomplete.
The Bench expressed concern over the failure of the prosecution and investigating agency to ensure the presence of material witnesses and observed that the trial court had remained a "mute spectator" during the proceedings.
The court noted that the investigating agency had virtually abandoned its responsibility after filing the chargesheet, while repeated opportunities granted to the prosecution did not result in the examination of crucial witnesses.
Finding that these shortcomings had resulted in a serious failure of the process of law, the High Court invoked its inherent jurisdiction and directed that the case be reopened and tried expeditiously.
The Bench emphasised that the operation of law could not be permitted to be subverted by anyone.
Advocate A.K. Shan appeared for the petitioner, while Advocate J.P. Gandhi, along with Advocates Ashok Singh, Nipun Gandhi and Sonam Sharma, represented the respondents.

Photo Gallery

BSE Sensex

NSE Nifty