Brij Raj Singh Jamwal And Another vs U. T. Of J&K on 7 March, 2025

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Brij Raj Singh Jamwal And Another vs U. T. Of J&K on 7 March, 2025

Author: Rajnesh Oswal

Bench: Rajnesh Oswal

                                                                             92


     HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                                AT JAMMU

Bail App No. 56/2025


Brij Raj Singh Jamwal and another                .....Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
                     Through: Mr. Ankesh Chandel, Adv.
                vs
U. T. of J&K                                                ..... Respondent(s)
                     Through: Mr. Pawan Dev Singh, Dy.AG


Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE
                                  ORDER

07.03.2025

Oral:

1. Through the medium of instant application, the petitioners are seeking

bail in anticipation of arrest in FIR No. 31/2025 for commission of

offence under sections 109, 191(2), 329(3) of BNS, 2023 and 3/25 Arms

Act, registered with Police Station, Domana, Jammu.

2. It is stated that the family of the petitioners has some land dispute with

the family of the complainant regarding which a civil litigation is also

going on but the complainant-Rekha Devi in order to harass, victimize

and build pressures upon the petitioners and their family members lodged

a complaint on 01.02.2025 before the Police Station, Domana Jammu

alleging therein that on 01.02.2025 at about 1.30 PM, the petitioners and

their family members trespassed into her land and after altercation,

petitioner No. 1 in order to kill the complainant, allegedly opened fire

with his revolver but with the grace of God she was saved.
2

Bail App No. 56/2025

3. It is further stated that the petitioners had earlier approached the court of

learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu for grant of bail in

anticipation of arrest but their application was dismissed by the court

vide order dated 24.02.2025, as such, the petitioners have filed the

present bail application for grant of bail in anticipation of arrest.

4. The respondent was put to notice, whereafter the respondent has filed the

status report, wherein the facts as narrated above, have been reiterated. It

is further stated in the status report that wife of petitioner No. 1 herein,

namely, Daisy Jamwal was arrested and later was enlarged on bail by the

court.

5. Mr. Ankesh Chandel, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

allegations have been levelled only against the petitioner No. 1 and in

fact, the petitioner No. 2 has unnecessarily been arrayed as accused in the

FIR. He further submits that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents,

as such, they deserve protection from arrest.

6. Per contra, Mr. Pawan Dev Singh, learned Dy.AG representing

respondent submits that the incident was video graphed in which the

petitioner No. 1 can be seen firing bullet from his revolver. He has

further submitted that there are serious allegations against the petitioners,

as such, they do not deserve any concession of bail.

7. Heard and perused the record.

8. A perusal of the status report reveals that there is a dispute with regard to

some land situated at Ward No. 65, Village Barnai, Jammu, regarding

which on 01.02.2025 at about 1.30 PM, the incident took place and
3

Bail App No. 56/2025

petitioner No. 1 fired one shot from his revolver. The allegations against

the accused persons are that they trespassed into the land of the

complainant but no specific role has been attributed to petitioner No. 2

and the allegation in respect of the firing bullet from the revolver is only

in respect of petitioner No. 1.

9. In light of the status report, this Court is of the considered view that

petitioner No. 2 has succeeded in making out a case for grant of bail in

anticipation of arrest. So far as the petitioner No. 1 is concerned, there

are serious allegations that he fired a shot from the revolver on an

unarmed lady, as such, this Court is not inclined to show indulgence to

protect petitioner No. 1 from arrest at this stage.

10. In view of the above, it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioner

No. 2, he shall be enlarged on bail, subject to following conditions:

(i) that he shall furnish two solvent sureties to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- each

to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer and personal bond of the

like amount.

(ii) that he shall appear before the Investigating Officer on 09.03.2025 at 10

A.M. and thereafter as and when required.

(iii) that in the event, any recovery is effected from the petitioner No. 2, he

shall be deemed to be in custody in terms of proviso to section 23 of the

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023.

(iv) that he shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the UT of J&K.

11. So far as the petitioner No. 1 is concerned, the present petition is

dismissed. It is made clear that in the event petitioner No. 1 files an
4

Bail App No. 56/2025

application before the learned Magistrate for grant of bail, the learned

Magistrate shall consider his application in accordance with law and

any observation made by this Court in this order shall not come in the

way of petitioner No. 1, as this Court has considered the prayer of the

petitioner No.1 for grant of bail in anticipation of arrest only.

12. Mr. Pawan Dev Singh, learned Dy.AG shall file report with regard to

the compliance of conditions imposed by this Court on the next date of

hearing.

13. List on 12.03.2025.

14. In view of the urgency expressed, copy of this order be furnished to the

learned counsel for the petitioners under the seal and signatures of the

Bench Secretary.

(RAJNESH OSWAL)
JUDGE

Jammu:

07.03.2025
Rakesh
Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No
Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No

Rakesh Kumar
2025.03.10 17:10
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document