HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Bail App No. 201/2025 Manjeet Singh …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Tarun Sharma, Advocate. q vs UT of J&K. .…. Respondent(s) Through: Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG. Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SEKHRI, JUDGE ORDER 01.08.2025 01. The petitioner, through the medium of present petition, seeks short-term bail to attend the mundan ceremony of his son, scheduled for 01.08.2025 in Punjab, primarily on the ground that his similar plea has already been rejected by learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu [for short “the trial court”] vide order dated 25.02.2025. 02. The respondent-UT has filed the verification report today. 03. Heard and perused. 04. Mr. Tarun Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, has relied upon Sheikh Javed Iqbal @ Ashfaq Ansari @ Javed Ansari vs. State of Uttar Pradesh; (2024) 8 SCC 293 and an order passed by this Court in Asif Latief Naik vs. UT of J&K [CrlA(D) No. 74/2024 dated 01.01.2025], to contend that short-term bail is recognized under law on humanitarian grounds, regardless of the gravity of offence. 05. A perusal of the record reveals that petitioner approached the trial court for medical bail, which came to be declined vide order dated 25.02.2025. There is nothing on the record to indicate that petitioner ever approached the trial court for short-term bail to attend the mundan ceremony of his son. Since the petitioner is 45 2 Bail App No. 201/2025 guilty of suppression of material facts from this Court, the present petition is liable to be dismissed. 06. No doubt, a short-term bail is recognized under law on humanitarian grounds such as medical emergencies, bereavement in the family or performance of religious rituals. However, the accused, in such cases, is required to first approach the concerned trial court and only in case of rejection, he can approach the High Court for emancipation. 07. In both the aforesaid cases, relied by learned counsel for the petitioner, the accused had first approached the concerned trial courts for short-term bail and only after their pleas were declined, they approached the High Court. 08. Be that as it may, the mundan ceremony of the petitioner’s son is scheduled for today, it is unlikely that petitioner would be able to reach his hometown and attend the ceremony. 09. In view of the above, the present petition is found devoid of merit, hence dismissed. (Rajesh Sekhri) Judge Jammu 01.08.2025 Abinash