Principal Sessions Judge Declines Relief to Staff Nurse, Hospital Sanitation Worker and Another Accused; Investigation Continues
KISHTWAR, OCTOBER 11: The Court of Principal Sessions Judge Kishtwar, presided over by Sudhir Kumar Khajuria, has rejected the bail applications of three accused persons in a case involving the alleged sexual assault of a minor girl, an alleged attempt to terminate her pregnancy and her subsequent death.
The accused whose bail pleas were dismissed include Sonika Parihar, a staff nurse at District Hospital Kishtwar; Zareena Begum, a sanitation worker at the hospital; and Peer Baksh. Separate orders were passed by the court on October 10, 2026.
The court took note of the ongoing investigation, the material collected by the investigating agency and the stage of the proceedings while declining to grant bail to the three accused.
COURT NOTES ONGOING INVESTIGATION AND EVIDENCE
In the case concerning Sonika Parihar, the prosecution alleged that she, while serving as a staff nurse at District Hospital Kishtwar, advised medicines in connection with an alleged attempt to terminate the minor girl’s pregnancy.
The court noted that witness statements recorded under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), along with call detail records, had been collected. However, the investigation was still underway, and the court declined to grant her bail at this stage.
SANITATION WORKER’S BAIL PLEA ALSO REJECTED
The court also rejected the bail application of Zareena Begum, who was working as a sanitation worker at District Hospital Kishtwar.
According to the prosecution, she allegedly performed an episiotomy on the minor girl in the labour room without obtaining the requisite permission or advice from the concerned doctors or nursing staff.
While considering her plea, the court noted that the investigation remained in progress and that witness statements and call detail records had been collected by the investigating agency.
COURT DECLINES BAIL TO PEER BAKSH
The third bail application, filed by Peer Baksh, was also dismissed.
The prosecution alleged that Peer Baksh organised meetings described as Grameen Panchayats at his residence and pressured the victim’s family not to approach the legal authorities. It further alleged that he was part of a conspiracy involving other accused persons in connection with the alleged termination of the pregnancy.
The court observed that witness statements and call detail records had been collected, while the investigation continued.
The court also examined medical documents submitted by Peer Baksh, which reportedly showed that he had remained admitted to a hospital from August 24 to 26, 2026. However, the court found that the records did not indicate a life-threatening medical condition sufficient to warrant bail at this stage.
CASE INVOLVES ALLEGED SEXUAL ASSAULT AND DEATH OF MINOR
The case relates to the death of a minor girl whose school records reportedly established that she was below 16 years of age.
According to the prosecution, the girl became pregnant following an alleged sexual assault and later developed complications. She reportedly died while being shifted to Jammu for medical treatment. A premature male foetus was also delivered during the sequence of events, according to the case details.
The circumstances surrounding the minor’s pregnancy, the alleged attempt to terminate it and the events preceding her death form part of the ongoing investigation.
SPECIAL CRIME WING INVESTIGATING THE CASE
The case is being investigated by the Special Crime Wing of the Crime Branch Jammu. The proceedings involve provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
While rejecting the bail applications, the court considered the seriousness of the allegations, the material collected during the investigation and the fact that the probe had not yet been completed.
The court reiterated that bail is not granted automatically and that the relevant circumstances of each case must be considered before deciding such applications.
ADVOCATES APPEARING BEFORE THE COURT
Advocate Rajesh Sharma appeared on behalf of Sonika Parihar, while Advocate V.K. Sharma represented Zareena Begum. Advocate Safder Ali Shoket appeared for Peer Baksh.
Public Prosecutor Anshuman Dubay represented the prosecution, while Advocate Irfan Khan appeared on behalf of the victim.
The allegations against the accused remain subject to proof in accordance with law, and the investigation is continuing.(KNC)
