JAMMU : The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Jammu has sought objections from the respondents on a pre-arrest bail plea filed by a senior practicing advocate in connection with a dowry case registered at Police Station Vijaypur in Samba district.
Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi passed the directions while hearing Bail Application No. 221/2026 filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. The petitioner is seeking bail in anticipation of arrest in FIR No. 157/2026 registered on September 22, 2026 at Police Station Vijaypur under Sections 318, 351 and 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, besides Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
The petitioner, Sanjeev Kumar Sareen, stated to be a senior practicing advocate with more than 35 years of standing, has claimed that he was falsely implicated in the case. As recorded in the High Court order, the allegation against him concerns an alleged demand of Rs 25 lakh, a luxury car and a gold chain in connection with the marriage of his son with the complainant's daughter. It has further been alleged that on non-fulfilment of the demands, the petitioner took the Barat back.
The petitioner had earlier approached the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Samba, seeking pre-arrest bail, but the plea was dismissed on September 24, 2026. He subsequently approached the High Court seeking relief.
During the proceedings, senior counsel Rahul Pant, appearing for respondent No. 2, raised an issue regarding disclosure of the petitioner's criminal antecedents in the bail petition. He submitted that under Rule 10 of the Rules and Orders for the Guidance of Courts Subordinate to the High Court of Judicature, Svt. 1988 (Criminal), inserted through Notification No. 1398 of 2026/RG dated July 2, 2026, the petitioner was required to disclose his criminal antecedents, if any.
The counsel further submitted that an FIR registered against the petitioner by his wife under Sections 307, 323, 505 and 506 of the RPC was still pending, but the same had not been disclosed in the petition. A photocopy of the FIR was also produced before the Court in the open Court.
The High Court, after hearing the submissions, directed the respondents to file their objections to the application by or before the next date of hearing. The matter has been listed for October 6, 2026.
The order was pronounced on September 29, 2026. The petitioner was represented by senior advocate P.N. Raina along with advocates Ashish Sharma and Ankit Dogra, while the UT of J&K was represented by Deputy Advocate General Vishal Bharti. Respondent No. 2 was represented by senior advocate Rahul Pant along with advocate Dhruv Pant.