Serial No. 23 Supp. Cause List IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR TrP (Crl) 18/2025 CrlM(973/2025) MOHAMMAD AYOUB DAR …Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s). Through: None Vs. UNION TERRITORY THROUGH POLICE STATION SUMBAL ...Respondent(s). Through: Mr.Jahangir Ahmad Dar, GA CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE ORDER 12.12.2025 1. It was submitted by the counsel for the respondent that case titled as “State Vs. Wali Mohammad Mir & Anr”. arising out of FIR No. 125/1996 has culminated into charge sheet for commission of offences under Sections 302, 307, 325, 341/34 RPC and 7/27 Arms Act trial whereof was going on in the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bandipora to whom the case was assigned by Principal Sessions Judge, Bandpora and that in terms of High Court order No. 1223 of 2025/RG dated 07.04.2025, wherein it is stated that the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Bandipora shall hold its sitting for three days of the week at Sumbal Headquarter and that in pursuant thereof the trial was being held at Sumbal. So much so the case also is of P/S Sumbal and even the witnesses too are from Submal area, so the petition is misconceived. Because in terms of the order dated 07.04.2025 of the High Court, the Additional Sessions Judge, Bandipora would hold court at Sumbal for the public good and for effectiveness of justice delivery system and with a view to enhance the efficiency of justice delivery. 2. The petitioner by the medium of the aforesaid petition claims that the trial be held at Bandipora Headquarter and that the case has been transferred from one place to another, which is inconvenient to him. That plea is of noconsequence giventhe fact that criminal case is of P/S Sumbal ordinarily the trial had got to be undertaken in the nearest Sessions court, and given the arrangement made by the High Court it has been thought proper that ends of justice would be met if the trials are held at Sumbal instead of Bandipora. 3. Petitioner, thus, has got no case for s transfer even otherwise it is for the benefit of the petitioner and for his speedy trial the court would be sitting at Sumbal enabling the witnesses and accused to have hassle free appearance at Sumbal instead of travelling to the Bandipora, where the Court is headquartered. 4. In terms of Section 86 of BNSS Act, 2023, the Court of Session shall ordinary hold its sitting at such place or places as the High Court by notification may specify and the petitioner has not thrown any challenge to the order of High Court. 5. I seek no grounds to intervene in this matter, even otherwise also the petitioner lastly remained absent and today also there is no representation on his behalf. 6. For the aforesaid reasons this petition has got no merits and is therefore, dismissed. 7. Copy of the order be notified. 8. Let the Trial Court proceed ahead in accordance with law. 9. (SANJAY PARIHAR) JUDGE SRINAGAR 12.12.2025 “S.Nuzhat”