Advocate Not Above Law, But Police Must Follow Due Process: J&K HC [Read Order]

Srinagar: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar has disposed of a writ petition filed by an Advocate who alleged that he was being intimidated and repeatedly summoned by the police in connection with a POCSO investigation, directing that if his assistance or presence is required in the investigation, it shall be sought strictly in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law.

Justice Sanjay Parihar was hearing a writ petition filed, an Advocate, after examining an affidavit filed by the respondents in compliance with an earlier order dated 17.08.2026. It emerged from the submissions of counsel that FIR No.198/2026 had been registered at Police Station Ramban for offences under Section 137 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 4/5 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, and that Police Station Ramban had, on 06.08.2026, addressed a communication to the SHO, Police Station Magam, requiring the petitioner to render assistance in the investigation.

It appeared that the petitioner, being an Advocate, had drafted an affidavit on behalf of the alleged victim in respect of whom the FIR had been registered, and it was in connection with the investigation arising out of the FIR that he was called upon to appear before the police. The petitioner's case was that, under the garb of this investigation, he had been subjected to intimidation and harassment and repeatedly called to the police station without adherence to due process. This was controverted by counsel for the respondents, who submitted that the affidavit drafted by the petitioner itself indicated that the alleged victim, who had been reported missing, had been in contact with the petitioner, and it was in this background that the police had sought to question him about her whereabouts.

The Court held that it could not be said that the respondents had acted dehors the process of law while conducting the investigation, observing that “merely because the petitioner is an Advocate does not place him above the law”, and that, being an officer of the Court, he was expected to render such lawful assistance to the investigating agency as may be required so that the truth concerning the alleged offence is brought to light. The Court equally clarified that the police agency was required to act strictly within the four corners of law, and that in seeking any information or assistance from the petitioner, the investigating agency shall scrupulously adhere to the procedure established by law.

Counsel for the petitioner submitted that, after the filing of the petition, the police had stopped calling the petitioner, and fairly conceded that the cause of action did not survive as on date. He nevertheless sought a direction to obviate any apprehension of future harassment, requesting that the police be directed not to summon, call, or otherwise require the petitioner's presence except in accordance with due process of law.

Having regard to these submissions, the Court disposed of the petition, directing the respondents that, while proceeding with the investigation of FIR No.198/2026, if the petitioner's assistance or presence is required, it shall be sought strictly in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law, along with the connected miscellaneous applications.

Appearances:

For the Petitioner: Mr. Wani Manzoor, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Harris Khan, Assisting Counsel.

Case Title: Wasim Ahmad Reshi v. UT of JK and Others, WP(C) No.1948/2026

[Read Order]