Serial No. 17 REGULAR CAUSE LIST HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CrlA(D) 2/2022 UNION TERRITORY THROUGH POLICE STATION CHARISHARIEF …Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. M. Younis, GA Vs. TANVEER AHMAD LAWAY AND ORS. ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Wajid Haseeb, Advocate CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Parihar, Judge. ORDER 10.11.2025 1. Impugned in this appeal filed by the appellant under Section 21 of the NIA Act is an order dated 22.06.2021, whereby the Court of Special Judge designated under NIA Act, Srinagar has granted bail to the contesting respondents in case FIR No. 02/2019 of Police Station Chari-Sharief, Budgam under section 18/19/39 of UAP Act. Nuzhat Shafi I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 11.11.2025 13:56 2. This appeal was preferred immediately after the passing of the impugned order and has been pending in this Court for the last more than 3 ½ years. 3. At the time the impugned order was passed by the court below, only 24 witnesses have been recorded, whereas the statement of thirteen (13) witnesses recorded by the prosecution were admitted by the contesting respondents. It seems that during the last about four (04) years the Trial Court has been able to record only four witnesses, which is not a good state of affairs. 4. Be that as it may, fact remains that only seven (07) witnesses including the Investigating Officer (IO) remain to be examined and the case is near its completion. That apart, nothing has been brought to our notice by the appellant that the contesting respondents, after having been released on bail, have either jumped the bail or violated any of the terms and conditions of the bail. 5. In view of the aforesaid and also looking to the merits of the case, we are of the considered opinion that no Nuzhat Shafi I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 11.11.2025 13:56 useful purpose will be served by keeping this appeal pending in this Court for adjudication, more particularly when the trial is almost complete. 6. For all these reasons we are not inclined to interfere with the order impugned passed by the designated court (supra) and accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. (Sanjay Parihar) (Sanjeev Kumar) Judge Judge SRINAGAR: 10.11.2025 “S.NUZHAT” Nuzhat Shafi I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 11.11.2025 13:56