Serial No. 25 REGULAR LIST IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CrlM/1561/2025 IN CrlA(D)/82/2025 UT TH. POLICE SATION QAZIGUND …Petitioner/Appellant(s) Through: Ms. Maha Majeed, AC vice Mr. Mohsin Qadri, Sr. AAG Vs. ATTA MOHD MALIK ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Wajid Haseeb, Advocate CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE ORDE R 28.04.2026 CrlM No. 1561/2025 1. This is an application for condonation of delay of 425 days in preferring an appeal against an order dated 15th July, 2024 passed by the Court of Special Judge Designated NIA Court for Districts Kulgam & Shopian [“the trial court”] in Bail Application No. 27/2024 titled “Atta Mohd Malik Vs. State of J&K”, whereby the trial court has held the respondent entitled to be enlarged on bail in default of submission of chargesheet within the prescribed period. 2. The delay is sought to be explained by submitting that the decision to file an appeal against the impugned order granting default bail was taken after seeking opinion from different authorities, including the Director Prosecution, and it is in this process a huge time was wasted. 3. We have gone through the application and the explanation tendered. We are not convinced that the appellant has been able to justify a huge delay of 425 days in filing the appeal. We understand that some reasonable time is taken by the authorities to peruse the record and MIR ARIF MANZOOR I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 29.04.26 take an informed decision as to whether they should go for an appeal against the order of bail or not, but taking 425 days in taking such decision is incomprehensible and cannot be condoned on mere asking. 4. Otherwise also, we have gone through the order impugned sought to challenged by way of appeal and do not find any illegality or infirmity in the order. The respondent applied for grant of bail on 22nd July 2024, whereas challan was presented in the court on 23rd April, 2024. The prescribed period for filing the chargesheet had expired long back. 5. Be that as it may, the facts remains that in the absence of any satisfactory explanation and cogent cause demonstrated by the appellant, the delay of more than 425 days cannot be condoned. The application is found devoid of any merit and is accordingly dismissed. Consequently, the appeal bearing CrlA(D) No. 82/2025 is also dismissed. (SANJAY PARIHAR) (SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE JUDGE SRINAGAR: 28.04.2026 “ARIF MIR ARIF MANZOOR I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 29.04.26