HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR (Through Virtual Mode) CrlM No. 554/2024 in CrlA (D) No. 28/2024 Union Territory through Police Station Kakapora .....Applicant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through :- Mr. Mohsin Qadri, Sr. AAG v/s Mohammad Yaseen Malik .....Respondent(s) Through :- Mr. Abid Malla, Advocate CORAM: HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.A. CHOWDHARY, JUDGE ORDER 15.04.2025 CrlM No. 554/2024 1. This appeal, preferred by the Union Territory of J & K against order dated 22.11.2023, passed by the Court of Special Judge (designated under NIA Act) Pulwama [“the Trial Court”] in case titled UT of J & K Vs. Mohammad Yaseen Malik is delayed by 129 days. Hence, the instant application seeking condonation. 2. The delay has been sought primarily on the ground that the requisite formalities which are to be complied with for filing the appeal in such matters took some time. What is stated by the appellant in the instant application can be seen from Para 4 of the application which reads thus: “The Law Department considered the matter on its merits and decided to challenge the judgment/order dated 22.11.2023 passed by the learned Court of Special Judge (designated under NIA Act), Pulwama before this Hon’ble Sr. No. 08 2 CrlM No. 554/2024 in CrlA (D) No. 28/2024 Court. Sanction to file Appeal was given by the law Department vide Govt. Order No. 2710-LD (ACQ) of 2024 dated 27.02.2024. Subsequently, the learned counsel (SAAG) took up the matter with the Appellants for furnishing the relevant documents along with certified copy of the impugned judgment so that appeal is drafted and filed before the Hon’ble Court. After receiving the relevant records, the learned Counsel took some days for drafting and filing of the Appeal. Thus, the delay has not been caused in filing of the Appeal deliberately, willfully or intentionally.” 3. From the reading of the above para, we are not convinced that the appellant has been able to demonstrate the sufficient cause to justify the delay of 129 days in filing the appeal. In terms of Para 4 of the application, the sanction to file appeal by the Department of Law was granted on 27.02.2024 and yet the matter was delayed and the appeal was filed on 29.04.2024 and there is no explanation given for this delay as well. 4. For all these reasons, we are not inclined to entertain this belated appeal. The application, is therefore, dismissed, as a consequence whereof, CrlA (D) No. 28/2024 shall also stand dismissed. (M.A. Chowdhary) (Sanjeev Kumar) Judge Chief Justice (A) JAMMU 15.04.2025 Manan Whether the order is speaking : Yes/No Whether the order is reportable : Yes/No