Dismissed

Bashir Ahmad Sheikh v. Umair Ul Islam

J&K HC17 Sept 2026CRM(M)/246/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a petition challenging a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the cognizance order, holding that the petitioner had participated in the trial up to the defence evidence stage without raising objections, and the petition appeared aimed at delaying the trial.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; interim direction vacated; petitioner left to raise defences before the trial court.

Bashir Ahmad Sheikh Vs Umair Ul Islam — Cheque Dishonour | J&K HC (2026)

¶1

S. No. 02 Regular Cause List

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT 0F JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR

¶3

CRM(M) 246/2026 CrlM(578/2026)

¶4

BASHIR AHMAD SHEIKH

¶5

…Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)

¶6

Through: Mr. Sajad Ashraf, Advocate

Vs.

UMAIR UL ISLAM

...Respondent(s)

Through: Mr. M. Younis Sheikh, Advocate

¶11

CORAM:

¶12

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE

¶13

ORDER 17.09.2026

¶14

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and peruse the record of the Trial court.

¶15

The petitioner has challenged the complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as well as the consequential order of cognizance dated 18.06.2022. However, after the passing of the said order, the petitioner participated in the trial proceedings. As is evident from the record of the Trial Court, the matter has now reached the stage of defence evidence. This indicates that, throughout the proceedings, the petitioner did not raise any objection either to the taking of cognizance or to the maintainability of the complaint on the grounds now sought to be urged.

¶16

Once the petitioner has participated in the trial and the proceedings have advanced to the stage of recording defence evidence, he cannot, at this belated stage, turn around and contend that the

¶17

¶18

CRM(M) 246/2026 CrlM(578/2026)

¶19

complaint, on the face of it, does not disclose the commission of an

¶20

offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

¶21

In the circumstances, the filing of the present petition appears to be an attempt to delay and protract the trial proceedings without any justifiable cause.

¶22

For the reasons recorded hereinabove, no case warranting interference is made out. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to raise all such defences as may be available to him in accordance with law before the Trial Court.

¶23

The interim direction, if any, shall stand vacated.

¶24

The petition, along with the connected CrLM(s), is accordingly

¶25

dismissed.

¶26

(SANJAY PARIHAR) JUDGE

¶27

Srinagar

¶28

17.09.2026 “Imtiyaz”

¶29

Imtiyaz Ul Gani I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶30

18.09.2026 12:10

Bashir Ahmad Sheikh v. Umair Ul Islam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bashir Ahmad Sheikh v. Umair Ul Islam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases