Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

1947 DAILYLAW 1 (JK)

UNION TERRITORY THROUGH POLICE STATION KRALPORA (POLICE / HOME) v. ABDUL MAJEED BEIGH

CrlA(D)/104/2025 · 2026-07-08

A, Mohd Yousuf Wani

body1947

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Serial No.25 REGULAR CAUSE LIST HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CrlM(1947/2025) IN CrlA(D) 104/2025 CrlM(1948/2025) UNION TERRITORY THROUGH POLICE STATION KRALPORA …Petitioner/Appellant(s) Through: Ms. Maha Majeed, Assisting Counsel vice Mr. Mohsin S. Qadri, Sr. AAG Vs. ABDUL MAJEED BEIGH ...Respondent(s) Through: None CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING) HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHD YOUSUF WANI, JUDGE ORDER 08.07.2026 CrlM No. 1947/2025 1. This is an application seeking condonation of delay of 353 days in filing the appeal challenging an order dated 20.11.2024 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge (Designated Court under NIA Act), Kupwara [“the trial Court”], in Bail Application 04/2023 titled (“Abdul Majeed Beigh Vs. UT of J&K”). 2. The delay has been sought to be explained by contending that, though the judgment impugned sought to be challenged in appeal was passed on 20.11.2024, in the presence of learned counsel for the appellant, but same could not be challenged within a period of limitation for the reason that it took some time for the authorities to deliberate on the issue and complete the requisite formalities. They have referred to certain communications/comments made by different authorities for facilitating the competent authority to take a final view with regard to the filing of appeal. 3. We have gone through the application in its entirety. We do not find that the delay in filing the appeal after about one year of expiry of limitation has been properly explained. It has been brought to our notice that in the trial, the prosecution has already produced and got examined 11 out of 13 prosecution witnesses and if that be the position, it would not be appropriate for us to have a fresh look on the order of grant of bail having regard to the fact that the trial is now at the verge of completion. 4. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merit in this application and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. Consequently, CrlA(D) No. 104/2025 shall also stand dismissed. (Mohd Yousuf Wani) (Sanjeev Kumar) Judge Chief Justice (Acting) SRINAGAR: 08.07.2026 Aadil