SRINAGAR: The High Court of Jammu Kashmir and Ladakh has stayed proceedings before a trial court in a road accident case after a widow challenged the police decision to array her deceased husband as an accused, observing that criminal liability is personal and abates upon death.
Justice Shahzad Azeem, while hearing a petition filed by Arshida Bano, observed that the final report naming a deceased person as an accused creates an anomalous and incorrect public record and that his legal heirs have a legitimate interest in seeking its correction.
The court passed the interim directions on November 4 while considering a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
The petitioner is the widow of Sheikh Muzaffar Ahmad, who died at SKIMS Soura, Srinagar, on April 30, 2026, following injuries sustained in a road accident on April 25 near Sheikhbagh Kangan on the National Highway.
Following the accident, FIR No. 35/2026 was registered at Police Station Kangan under Sections 106 and 281 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, and Section 122/177 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
After completing the investigation, police filed a final report under Section 193 of the BNSS, naming the car driver as an accused and the deceased motorcyclist as accused No. 2 on the grounds of contributory negligence.
Challenging the police action, the petitioner questioned the manner of investigation, the failure to seize photographs and recover CCTV footage, alleged contradictions in the investigation and the shifting of her husband’s body from SKIMS Soura to Sub-District Hospital (SDH) Kangan for postmortem examination.
She also questioned why the postmortem was conducted at SDH Kangan despite the availability of medical records at SKIMS Soura and the family’s request that the examination be carried out at the Srinagar hospital.
The petitioner further sought disclosure of the circumstances leading to the shifting of the body, production of case diaries, investigation records and witness statements, and further investigation into the role of two women passengers who allegedly stopped the car while taking photographs.
She also sought seizure of their photography devices and the data stored in them to secure relevant evidence, besides an inquiry by senior police officers into the conduct of the investigating officer and action against the officials allegedly involved.
The court observed that the petitioner’s interest in the matter was not merely personal, as the finding of negligence against her deceased husband could have civil consequences, particularly in any compensation claim under the Motor Vehicles Act.
“While criminal liability is personal and abates on death, the judicial record remains,” the court observed.
It further held that once an accused person dies, the court cannot continue the trial, frame charges or record a conviction or acquittal against him, as proceedings against the deceased stand abated.
“Proceedings against the deceased person abate,” the court noted.
Taking note of the circumstances, Justice Azeem observed that, prima facie, there appeared to be a violation of statutory safeguards and non-observance of procedure, resulting in the presentation of a challan against a deceased person.
The court issued notice in the main petition as well as the accompanying application, directing that the matter be listed on December 22, 2026.
It also directed the investigating officer to remain personally present before the court on the next date of hearing and ordered that the scanned record of the trial court be summoned.
Meanwhile, subject to objections from the respondents and until the next date of hearing, the court stayed proceedings before the trial court.
The court has not yet finally adjudicated the allegations raised by the petitioner.
