HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Bail App No. 93/2025 c/w CRM(M) No. 282/2025 Manoj Sahni …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. K.D. S. Kotwal, Advocate. q vs UT of Ladakh. .…. Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Vishal Sharma, DSGI. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MA CHOWDHARY, JUDGE ORDER 17.11.2025 Bail App No. 93/2025. 01. Petitioner-Manoj Sahni, through the medium of this bail application, seeks his admission to bail in a case arising out of FIR No. 134/2024 registered on 16.10.2024 at Police Station, Leh for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 8/20 NDPS Act, asserting that he has been falsely implicated in the case and that the prosecution has dilated about his possession of ‘Ganja’ and ‘Charas’ on different occasions and, as such, the prosecution itself is uncertain, as to what ‘Ganja’ or ‘Charas’ was recovered from him, and the trial court, before framing of charge, recorded the statement of the I.O. so as to correct the allegation of recovery of ‘Charas’ instead of ‘Ganja’ from his possession and proceeded further with the case instead of sending back the challan for doing the needful for laying charge-sheet afresh; that the trial court rejected his application for grant of bail, whereas his co-accused, from whose possession Ganja was alleged to have been recovered, was admitted to bail on the plea that the statutory bar was applicable only to the petitioner’s case and not to that of the co-accused. 02. Learned counsel for the petitioner, after arguing for a while and conceding that most of the witnesses have been examined, submits that except for PW-1 Ataullah Khan and PW-2 Tahir Hussain, Executive Magistrate and Nambardar of the village respectively, all other witnesses are police officials of the Police 03 2 Bail App No. 93/2024 Station Leh and the statements of most of the prosecution witnesses stand recorded. He states that he has instructions from the petitioner to withdraw the present bail application and instead seek a direction from this Court to the trial court for expeditious disposal of the trial in a bound period. His statement is taken on record, in support of his contention. 03. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner with regard to not pressing this application for grant of bail in view of the fact that just six witnesses have been cited in the charge-sheet and most of them have already been examined, the application is disposed of as withdrawn with a direction to the trial court to conclude the trial within next two months from the date this order is served upon it. The trial court shall make efforts to conclude the trail against the accused expeditiously so that the petitioner does not remain in custody for the purpose of trial. 04. The application is accordingly dismissed in the above terms and with the aforesaid directions to the trial court. CRM(M) No. 282/2025 This petition is directed to be listed before the appropriate Bench of Jammu wing on 02.12.2025. (MA Chowdhary) Judge Jammu 17.11.2025 Abinash