This order addresses an interim stay application concerning a warrant of arrest in a cheque dishonour case. The Court cited Supreme Court precedent regarding territorial jurisdiction and proceeded to stay the warrant pending appearance.
Stay of the warrant of arrest pending appearance of the petitioner before the trial court on the date fixed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
22 Regular
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
CRM(M) 716/2026 CrlM(1625/2026)
RAFIQ HASSAN SHAH ….. Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Firdous Ahmad Advocate.
JAVID HUSSAIN BHAT .. Respondent(s)
Through:
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajnesh Oswal, Judge
ORDER
07.09.2026
P a g e | 2 CRM(M) 716/2026 CrlM(1625/2026)
(Rajnesh Oswal)
Judge
SRINAGAR 07.09.2026 Aasif
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should stay the warrant of arrest issued under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act before appearance in trial court.
Whether lack of territorial jurisdiction under BNSS Section 225 prevents process issuance in cheque dishonour cases.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Re (2021) 16 SCC 116Referred¶15
Rafiq Hassan Shah
Javid Hussain Bhat
Rajnesh Oswal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
