HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR Bail App 214/2025 CrlM(1589/2025). UNION TERRITORY THROUGH POLICE STATION KAKAPORA. …Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Furqan Yaqub Sofi, GA. VERSUS IRFAN AYOUB KHAN. …Respondent(s) Through: None. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE. ORDER 10.02.2026 01. The UT of Jammu and Kashmir through the SHO, Police Station Kakapora is aggrieved by the grant of bail by the Court of Special Judge under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, (NDPS) 1985, Pulwama in favour of the sole accused person i.e., respondent- Irfan Ayoub Khan. 02. On the basis of FIR No. 12/2024 dated 17.03.2024, the respondent is stated to have been caught by a naka party and upon his personal search was found to be in possession of alleged contraband which resulted in the presentation of the final police report against him before the aforesaid Court. 03. The respondent came to apply for bail on 26.03.2024 and after one year of pendency of the said bail application was able to convince the learned trial court that a case is made out for his enlargement on bail. 12 Regular 04. The Court of Special Judge, NDPS, Pulwama, by a detailed reasoned order dated 21.04.2025, admitted the respondent to an interim bail subject to the terms and conditions set out in para 15 for the purpose of ensuring that the accused does not jump bail and also that the trial of the case does not suffer due to default of appearance on the part of the respondent. 05. The respondent seems to have conduct himself strictly in terms of the conditions of bail which is evident from the order dated 05.05.2025 whereby the interim bail order dated 21.04.2025 came to be made absolute i.e., again after one year of interim bail. 06. This Court finds no infirmity or illegality at the end of the Court of Special Judge, NDPS, Pulwama in considering the respondent being held entitled to be enlarged on bail. 07. The concern of the UT of Jammu and Kashmir in questioning the grant of bail should be better directed towards conducting the trial of the case in a serious and diligent manner to secure a judgment of conviction rather than chasing the grant of bail in favour of an accused. 08. Notwithstanding the fact that the case against the accused is under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, this Court may not lend any agreement to some part of the reasoning pressed into service by the Court of Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Pulwama which ought to have been avoided. However, the grant of bail in favour of the respondent is surely more on the factual aspects of the case in the context in which the arrest and booking of the respondent had come to take place. 09. Therefore, in the light of the aforesaid, this petition is held to be devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. (RAHUL BHARTI) JUDGE SRINAGAR 10.02.2026 Bisma Jan.