In a significant ruling that may impact how lower courts handle absent accused persons, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar has set aside a Kupwara trial court order that initiated proceedings against an accused under a stringent provision normally reserved for absconders. Justice Mohd Yousuf Wani delivered the order on August 13, 2025, in the case of Mohammad Sidiq Lone v. Union Territory of J&K and Ors.
Background
The case stemmed from FIR No. 72/2022, registered under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. The police alleged that Lone was linked to co-accused who were caught carrying contraband "charas" in a public bus. However, the petitioner argued that no recovery was made from him and his name surfaced only through the disclosure statement of others.
Despite this, the trial court in December 2022 initiated proceedings under Section 299 of the old Code of Criminal Procedure (now Section 335 of the BNSS), which allows courts to record prosecution evidence in the absence of an accused deemed absconding. The petitioner maintained that this was done without any legal groundwork like a proclamation or warrant, relying solely on the Investigating Officer’s word.
Court's Observations
Justice Wani scrutinized the trial court’s order and found it wanting.
"The proceedings under Section 299 of the Code were initiated on the mere asking of the Investigating Officer. The trial court was required to satisfy itself on the basis of documents," the bench observed.
The Judge highlighted that such provisions are exceptional, as they allow witness depositions to be recorded without the accused’s presence - a step that could permanently prejudice his right to cross-examination if witnesses die or become unavailable.
The High Court also noted a disturbing trend.
"Criminal courts often initiate proceedings under Section 299 on the mere asking of the IO, without ensuring that efforts to arrest the accused were exhausted," Justice Wani remarked, cautioning that such shortcuts can undermine fair trial rights.
Decision
Quashing the trial court's order dated December 12, 2022, the High Court directed the petitioner to surrender before the trial court. Importantly, Lone was granted the liberty to apply for bail, with the trial court instructed to decide the plea expeditiously.
The case closed with a gentle but firm reminder from the High Court: extraordinary provisions like Section 299/335 must be invoked only after strict compliance with safeguards, not as a convenient tool for investigators.
Case Title: Mohammad Sidiq Lone v. Union Territory of J and K and Ors.
Case No.: CRM(M) 471/2025 CrlM 1133/2025