Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh Excessive Courtroom stays case towards ‘Article 370’ filmmaker Aditya Dhar – Imperial Wire

“Report was referred to as from the courtroom of forest Justice of the Peace, Srinagar; its perusal would reveal that the courtroom has not proceeded in accordance with legislation,” the courtroom noticed on February 6.

Keep on defamation proceedings

• The pre-cognisance discover was issued to the petitioners on December 30, 2025.
• They’ve been directed to look on February 7, however there’s nothing on file to point out that the assertion of the complainant or that of the witnesses has been recorded.
• Topic to objections of the opposite aspect and until the following date of listening to earlier than the bench, the proceedings within the criticism filed by the respondent shall keep.
• Judgment delivered by Allahabad Excessive Courtroom dominated {that a} Justice of the Peace should first file statements beneath Part 223 (examination of complainant) BNSS earlier than deciding whether or not to dismiss the criticism or problem a discover to the accused.
• The Karnataka Excessive Courtroom, in one in every of verdict clarified that the taking of cognisance solely happens after recording the sworn assertion and offering the accused a possibility to be heard.

‘Depicted as terrorist’

• The case originated from a criticism filed by Ghulam Mohammad Shah earlier than the forest Justice of the Peace, Srinagar.
• Shah alleged that the petitioners, filmmaker Aditya Dhar and others, who’re concerned within the improvement and manufacturing of function movies, used his {photograph} within the film Article 370.
• In accordance with the criticism, Shah was depicted as a terrorist inside the context of the movie’s plot, inflicting important hurt to his status.
• Based mostly on these allegations, the Justice of the Peace had issued a pre-cognisance summons for an offence punishable beneath Part 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, which offers with defamation.
• The petitioners, filmmakers Aditya Dhar and others, approached the excessive courtroom looking for aid towards an order issued by the magistrate, Srinagar, on December 30, 2025.
• Representing the filmmaker Aditya Dhar and others, senior advocate Syed Faisal Qadri together with DSK authorized workforce together with advocates Farman Ali Magrey, Parag Khandhar, Ibrahim Alam, Chandrima Mitra, and Sikander Hayat Khan argued that the Justice of the Peace’s order was legally flawed.
• He additional argued that the Justice of the Peace is beneath an obligation to look at upon oath the complainant and the witnesses current, and the substance of such examination must be diminished to writing and signed by the complainant, witnesses, and likewise by the Justice of the Peace.