SRINAGAR: The High Court of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar has rejected the bail plea of four men accused in a 2022 gang-rape case involving a 15-year-old girl, citing the seriousness of the alleged offences, the statutory presumption under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and the advanced stage of the trial.
Justice M A Chowdhary dismissed the joint bail application filed by Irqan Ahmad Dar, Basit Ali Dar, Irfan Ahmad Najar and Firdous Ahmad Ahanger, who have remained in judicial custody since February 15, 2022.
The case arises from FIR No. 02/2022, registered at Bemina Police Station, Srinagar, on February 11, 2022, initially under Section 363 of the IPC. Following investigation, the accused were charge-sheeted under Sections 363, 376-DA and 109 IPC and Sections 6 and 17 of the POCSO Act.
According to the prosecution case recorded by the High Court, the complainant reported that his 15-year-old daughter had left home to buy candies on February 11, 2022, but did not return. She was recovered from the Tourist Reception Centre in Srinagar the following day.
The court noted that during investigation, the girl stated that she had allegedly been kidnapped from JVC Srinagar in a Tata Sumo vehicle by four persons and taken to the Tangmarg forests, where she alleged that she was gang-raped. She subsequently reiterated the allegations before a Magistrate.
The High Court recorded that the prosecution case was supported by medical, digital and scientific evidence, and that the investigation culminated in the filing of the charge sheet before the trial court on April 8, 2022.
The accused had earlier sought bail before the trial court, but their applications were rejected through a composite order dated April 20, 2024.
While the petitioners relied principally on their prolonged incarceration, arguing that they had spent more than four years in custody and that the trial had been delayed, the High Court found that the trial was progressing rapidly.
The court noted that 22 of the 28 prosecution witnesses had already been examined, describing the pace of the proceedings as “phenomenal”. It further observed that only a couple of witnesses remained to be examined.
Justice Chowdhary held that although prolonged incarceration can be a relevant constitutional consideration in bail matters, the period of custody cannot be treated as an automatic ground for release, particularly when assessed alongside the nature of the allegations and the progress of the trial.
The court also noted the statutory presumption under the POCSO Act concerning culpable mental state and observed that the presumption had not been rebutted at this stage.
Given the alleged commission of gang rape against a 15-year-old girl, the severity of the offences and the prescribed punishment—which includes imprisonment for the remainder of natural life—the court held that the accused were not entitled to bail.
The court further said that releasing the accused at this stage could create a flight risk and raise concerns regarding the possibility of evading trial or tampering with prosecution evidence.
“The application is found to be bereft of any merit and substance and is liable to be rejected,” the court said, while dismissing the bail application and connected applications.
The judgment was reserved on August 18, 2026, and pronounced and uploaded on August 29, 2026.
