MOHAMMAD RAFIQ PAHLOO vs UNION TERRITORY THROUGH POLICE STATION KOTHIBAGH (POLICE / HOME)

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU &KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT
SRINANGAR
Reserved on: 23.10.2026
Pronounced on: 13.11.2026
Uploaded on: 13.11.2026
Whether the operative part or
full judgment is pronounced:
Full
CrlA(D) No.1/2025
c/w
CrlA(D) No.114/2025
MOHAMMAD RAFIQ PHALOO
c/w
MOHAMMAD YASEEN BHAT
...APPELLANT(S)
Through: - Mr. Z. A. Qureshi, Sr. Advocate, with
Ms. Rehana, Advocate.
Mr. Wajid Haseeb, Advocate .
Vs.
UT OF J&K …RESPONDENT(S)
Through: - Ms. Maha Majeed, Assisting Counsel
Vice Mr. Mohsin Qadiri, Sr. AAG.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE
JUDGMENT
OSWAL-J
01 . Mohammad Yaseen Bhat (appellant in CrlA(D)
No.114/2025) and Mohammad Rafiq Phaloo (appellant in
CrlA(D) No. 01/2026) figure as accused No.1 and 2 along
with 10 others in chargesheet titled “State vs. Mohammad
Yaseen Bhat and others” arising out of FIR No. 23/2023
for commission of offences under Sections 10, 13, 18 of
CrlA(D) No.1/2026 c/w
CrlA(D) No.114/2025 Page 1 of 12

UA(P) Act and Sections 121-A, 201 of IPC registered with
Police Station Kothibagh pending before the Court of learned
Special Judge designated under NIA Act, Srinagar (for short
“the Trial Court”).
02 . The appellants had filed their respective bail
applications before the learned Trial Court and the learned
Trial Court, by way of two separate orders each dated
12.12.2025, dismissed the said bail applications. The
appellants have now come up with these two separate
appeals thereby assailing the orders supra whereby their
prayer for grant of bail has been rejected.
03 . Mohammad Rafiq Phaloo (appellant in CrlA(D)
No.01/2026 has assailed order dated 12.12.2025 passed by
the learned Trial Court on the grounds that the protected
witnesses, whose statements have been recorded, have not
supported the prosecution case vis-a-vis the appellant and
also they have not spoken anything about the conspiracy
allegedly hatched by the persons attending the Eid Milan
party for revival of the JKLF-Y. It is also contended that the
learned Trial Court has rejected the application by pressing
into service Section 43-D of UAPA despite the fact that no
prima facie case existed against the appellant for promoting
unlawful activities and waging war against the Union of
CrlA(D) No.1/2026 c/w
CrlA(D) No.114/2025 Page 2 of 12

India. It is also urged that the evidence so collected and
relied upon by the learned Trial Court for rejection of the
bail application comprises the alleged recovery of mobile
phone, forensic analysis, seizure of resolution, identification
of financial transactions and recovery of alleged anti-India
propagandistic material, but there is no evidence on record
to show or prove that the phone allegedly recovered from the
possession of the appellant contains any material to
establish the alleged conspiracy. Despite absence of any
such evidence, the learned Trial Court has drawn a
presumption that the appellant wanted to revive the
activities of JKLF-Y.
04. It is also contended that the learned Trial Court has
gravely erred in law by not considering the settled principle
that the test of prima facie true under Section 43-D(5) of
UAPA requires a careful, objective and judicious evaluation
of the material on record and not a mere reproduction or
acceptance of prosecution's allegations.
05 . Mohammad Yaseen Bhat (appellant in CrlA(D)
No.114/2025) has also assailed order dated 12.12.2025 on
the identical grounds by contending that the prosecution
case is based on hearsay evidence which is wholly
inadmissible under law and cannot constitute the material
CrlA(D) No.1/2026 c/w
CrlA(D) No.114/2025 Page 3 of 12

so as to satisfy the requirements in order to attract the
rigour of Section 43-D of Unlawful Activities Prevention Act
and on the face of story as projected by the police, the
appellant deserves to be given concession of bail. Besides,
the appellant has also cited his health condition for release
on bail.
06 . The respondent has filed its response stating therein
that appellant-Mohd. Yasin Bhat had acquired arms training
and exfiltrated POK a number of times to return only in
1992 along with Yasin Malik, whereas the appellant-Mohd.
Rafiq Pahloo was involved in FIR No. 339/1989 of P/S
Sadder regarding kidnapping of Rubiya Sayed and in FIR
No. 22/1990 of P/S Sadder regarding killing of Airforce
Officials. It is further stated that on 09.07.2023, Police
Station, Kothibagh received reliable information that some
persons along with the appellants had organized a meeting
at Habib Restaurant. While ostensibly organized as an “Eid
Milan party”, the gathering served as a front for ex-members
of the banned organization JKLF-Y and other separatist
activists to coordinate unlawful activities. The primary
objective was the revival of the prohibited JKLF-Y cadre to
wage war against the Government of India, thereby
compromising the sovereignty and security of the nation. On
receipt of this information, FIR No.23/2023 under Sections
CrlA(D) No.1/2026 c/w
CrlA(D) No.114/2025 Page 4 of 12

10, 13, 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act was
registered in Police Station Kothibagh. A raid was conducted
at the venue and 43 suspects were apprehended. After
preliminary questioning and verification of their
backgrounds, the investigation established the direct
involvement of 10 accused and both the appellants. The
appellants were formally arrested on 10.07.2023 following
the recovery of mobile phones and other incriminating
digital evidence. The investigation utilized forensic analysis
of seized digital devices (DVRs and mobile phones) and site
inspections. The key findings included a resolution letter
dated 06.10.2022 recovered from the residence of the
accused, confirming the appointment of appellant
Mohammad Rafiq Phaloo alias Saleem Nana Ji as incharge
of Jammu and Kashmir with Khurshid Ahmad Mir (based in
POK) as representative for POK. Forensic reports revealed
constant communication with foreign handlers including
Farooq Siddiqui of Kashmir Global Council, a secessionist
organization based abroad and active terrorists in Pakistan.
The seized devices contained secessionist literature, KGC
advocacy document and voice notes advocating for
independent Kashmir and the release of convicted JKLF
Chairman Mohammad Yasin Malik. Intercepted
communications suggest the illegal transfer of foreign
CrlA(D) No.1/2026 c/w
CrlA(D) No.114/2025 Page 5 of 12

currency (UK Pounds) intended for distribution among
associates to sustain secessionist activities. The
investigation proved a well-knit conspiracy by the accused to
rejuvenate the banned JKLF-Y and Hurriyat factions under
the guise of KGC, provoke the masses and lure youth
towards anti-national activities through social media
propaganda and hatred speech, and coordinate with cross-
borders handlers to disturb public tranquility and challenge
the territorial integrity of India. After the conclusion of
investigation, the chargesheet was laid before the trial court.
It is stated that the appellants are involved in the
commission of serious offence carrying severe punishment
up to imprisonment for life and there is cogent evidence
available vis-à-vis their involvement. The appellants are
dangerous and threat to the sovereignty and integrity of the
nation, and further there are reasonable grounds for
believing that the accused would jump the concession of bail
if granted to them.
07 . Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record.
th
08. Admittedly, the appellants were arrested on 10 July,
2023 and were charged for the commission of offences under
Sections 10, 13, 18 of UAPA and under Section 121-A and
201 IPC in terms of order dated 02.04.2024, whereas the
CrlA(D) No.1/2026 c/w
CrlA(D) No.114/2025 Page 6 of 12

other accused were not charged for Section 18 of the UAPA.
It would be apt to observe that the appellant-Mohd. Yasin
Bhat had challenged the order of framing charge through
the medium of appeal bearing CrlA (D) No. 26/2024 but was
subsequently withdrawn along with appeal against the order
of rejection of application for grant of bail. The allegations
against the appellants are that during search of their
residential houses, incriminating objectionable material
have been seized including a resolution dated 06.10.2022.
In terms of the said resolution, the appellant Mohammad
Rafiq Phaloo was appointed as incharge JKLF of Jammu and
Kashmir. As per the allegations leveled in the chargesheet,
both the appellants are ex-militants of JKLF-Y who have
been conspiring with handlers across the border as well as
organizations like Kashmir Global Council to unite different
pro-freedom groups such as Hurriyat, JKLF, etc., and the
news of NIA seeking death penalty for Yasin Malik reignited
fire to conspire against the integrity and sovereignty of India
and they were trying to provoke the masses in an attempt to
overawe the Government by show of criminal force. During
the personal search of the appellants also, their respective
phones were recovered. It is further case of the prosecution
that during search of house of appellant Mohammad Yaseen
Bhat, two Samsung phones, one Nokia phone, one laptop, I-
CrlA(D) No.1/2026 c/w
CrlA(D) No.114/2025 Page 7 of 12

card, press note of meeting held on 05.10.2022 between
JKLF members issued by appellant Mohammad Rafiq
Phaloo, posters of Maqbool Bhat, Amanullah Khan and
Yasin Malik, photograph of appellants with Maqbool Bhat,
Amanullah Khan, Yasin Malik, late Syed Ali Shah Geelani
and Moulvi Umar Farooq, besides bank passbooks were
recovered. During the forensic examination of the phone of
the appellants, incriminating videos, voice notes,
photographs, press release of Kashmir Global Council and
letter pad of KGC were recovered. One such conversation
was allegedly held with Khurshid Mir who is active terrorist
of JKLF presently in POK. In one voice note, appellant
Mohammad Rafiq Phaloo is chanting slogans like 'Aeen-e-
Hind Manzoor Nahi' and 'Hindustan Murdabad'. During the
search of house of father of appellant Mohammad Rafiq
Phaloo, a resolution dated 06.10.2022, letterpad of JKLF,
biography with regard to militant activities and history of
militancy, JKLF logo, press cutting with regard to JKLF, two
passbooks of J&K Bank, poster of JKLF with regard to
release of Yasin Malik were recovered.
09 . The appellants, admittedly, have been charged, besides
others, for commission of offence under Section 18 of UA(P)
Act and rigors of Section 43-D are applicable. Though when
these appeals were filed, only four witnesses were examined,
CrlA(D) No.1/2026 c/w
CrlA(D) No.114/2025 Page 8 of 12

but record of the Trial Court reveals that eight more
witnesses have been examined by the prosecution and total
twelve witnesses have been examined till date, but the fact
remains that there are still material witnesses with regard to
the disclosure memo, seizure memos, who have not been
examined till date, though few have been examined. This
Court is conscious of the fact that in the last more than two
and half years, the prosecution has examined only 12
witnesses out of 68 witnesses, but the fact remains that the
material witnesses are yet to be recorded.
10 . The contention raised by the appellants that there is no
evidence against the appellants cannot be appreciated at
this stage, particularly when the material witnesses with
regard to the seizure of the incriminating material are yet to
be examined. Perusal of statements of the protected
witnesses reveal that one witness has turned hostile,
whereas another has not. This court would not like to
examine the merits of the evidence led by the prosecution till
date lest it shall prejudice the parties during trial. As
already observed above, the material witnesses are yet to be
examined.
11 . This Court has examined the impugned orders passed
by the learned Trial Court and we find that the learned Trial
CrlA(D) No.1/2026 c/w
CrlA(D) No.114/2025 Page 9 of 12

Court has rejected the bail applications preferred by the
appellants on various grounds including their antecedents,
recovery of secessionist documents, voice notes, etc. The
learned Trial Court has also observed that only four
witnesses have been examined so far and other witnesses
are yet to be examined. The criminal antecedents of the
appellants cannot be ignored at this stage. The judgment of
the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in “Syed Iftikhar
Andrabi Vs. National Investigation Agency” 2026 INSC 503,
relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant is not
applicable in the present facts and circumstances of the
case.
12 . In addition, appellant Mohammad Yaseen Bhat has
submitted that he is not in good health condition, whereas
the perusal of the impugned order reveals that the learned
Trial Court has considered the said ground and has
observed that recent coronary angiography report dated
14.05.2025 revealed non-obstructive coronary artery disease
and the report explicitly states condition can be managed
with medication. Further, the Trial Court also observed that
the gallbladder surgery is non-urgent elective surgery and
can be scheduled and conducted while the appellant
remains in custody. It is evident that appellant is being
provided proper medical facilities and it is not the case of
CrlA(D) No.1/2026 c/w
CrlA(D) No.114/2025 Page 10 of 12

the appellant that he is suffering from such disease which
cannot be managed while in custody. Accordingly, this
contention of the appellant Mohammad Yaseen Bhat is
rejected.
13. In view of the foregoing discussion, and having regard
to the nature and gravity of the offences alleged against the
appellants, the material presently available on record, as
well as the stage at which the trial is presently proceeding,
we do not find any ground warranting interference in favour
of the appellants at this stage. The material witnesses whose
testimony bears directly upon the disclosure statements
allegedly made by the appellants and the recoveries effected
pursuant thereto are yet to be examined by the prosecution.
Their examination would, therefore, be material for a proper
consideration of the role attributed to the appellants and the
evidentiary circumstances relied upon by the prosecution.
14 . Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the
merits of the case, the present appeals are dismissed .
However, the appellants shall be at liberty to approach the
learned Trial Court by filing fresh applications for bail after
the material witnesses pertaining to their disclosure
statements and the recoveries are examined by the
prosecution. Such applications, if filed, shall be considered
CrlA(D) No.1/2026 c/w
CrlA(D) No.114/2025 Page 11 of 12

by the learned Trial Court in accordance with law and on
their own merits, without being influenced by any
observation made in the present order.
15 . The learned Trial Court is requested to make all
endeavour to expedite the trial and to ensure that the
proceedings are taken to their logical conclusion at the
earliest. The learned Trial Court shall also endeavour to
avoid unnecessary adjournments and grant adjournments
only for reasons germane to the progress of the trial, so that
the proceedings are not unduly delayed.

(Sanjay Parihar) (Rajnesh Oswal)
Judge Judge
SRINAGAR
13.11.2026
“Bhat Altaf-Secretary”
Whether the judgment is reportable: NO



CrlA(D) No.1/2026 c/w
CrlA(D) No.114/2025 Page 12 of 12
MADAN LAL VERMA
2026.11.13 16:23
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document