Anantnag: The Jammu & Kashmir police have formally charged National Conference legislator Altaf Ahmad Wani, widely known as Altaf Kaloo, along with party spokesperson Umesh Bhat. The FIR was filed following a complaint lodged by the MLA’s Personal Security Officer (PSO).
The report was registered at Sadar Anantnag Police Station under Sections 121 and 351 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). Investigators are now examining the circumstances surrounding the allegation.
Dispute Said to Have Erupted During a Security Detail
According to the PSO’s account, a heated verbal exchange broke out while he was on duty safeguarding the legislator. The confrontation allegedly escalated, prompting the officer to accuse Kaloo and Bhat of physically assaulting him.
The officer further alleged that he sustained injuries, which led him to file the complaint and trigger the FIR.
The matter remains under investigation; no court has yet adjudicated the claims.
MLA Refutes the Accusations
Altaf Kaloo has categorically denied the charges, describing them as baseless. He says he raised concerns with security officials after observing that the PSO had been absent from his post for several days.
Kaloo claims he informed the Senior Superintendent of Police (Security) and requested verification. He alleges that the officer responded by pushing him during the ensuing confrontation.
The legislator has appealed to senior police officials, including the IGP of Kashmir and the SSP of Anantnag, to conduct an impartial investigation.
Police Weigh Both Accounts
The FIR presents two conflicting narratives. The PSO contends he was assaulted while performing his duties; Kaloo, in contrast, offers a different version of the encounter.
Kaloo has hinted at filing a counter‑complaint against the officer and urges investigators to scrutinise all statements and evidence before proceeding further.
Authorities have launched a formal probe to ascertain the exact sequence of events and establish the factual matrix of the case.
It is essential to note that an FIR merely registers a complaint; it does not constitute guilt. Any subsequent legal action will depend on the outcome of the ongoing investigation.
