SIMARJIT SINGH AND ANR. v. UNION TERRITORY THROUGH POLICE STATION KULGAM (HOME)
CRM(M)/352/2025 · 2025-06-30
Sanjay Dhar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7885 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7885 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
29 Regular
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
CRM (M) No. 352/2025 CrlM No. 840/2025
Simarjit Singh and anr.
….. Petitioner (s)
Through: Ms. Iqra Latief, Adv.
V/s
Union Territory through Police Station Kulgam
….. Respondent(s)
Through:
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar, Judge
ORDER 30.06.2025
1. Through the medium of present petition, the petitioners have challenged order dated 22.11.2024 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Kulgam whereby bail bonds and surety bonds of the petitioners have been forfeited and non-bailable warrants of arrest have been issued against petitioner No. 1.
2. Heard and considered.
3. It appears that petitioner No. 2 had stood as surety for petitioner No. 1 in a case arising out of FIR No. 36/2019 which is pending before the court of learned Principal Sessions Judge,
P a g e | 2 CRM (M) No. 352/2025 CrlM No. 840/2025
Kulgam. When petitioner No. 1 failed to put in his appearance before the learned trial court, his bail bond and surety bond were forfeited on 22.11.2024. Instead of applying for fresh bail, petitioner No. 1 has approached this Court by way of present petition. Similarly, instead of filing reply to show cause notice issued against the surety, petitioner No. 2 has also approached this Court by way of present petition.
4. Since the petitioners have alternative efficacious remedy of approaching the learned trial court by filing fresh bail application before the said court and by showing cause against forfeiture of bail/surety bonds, this court would not like to intervene in the present matter by entertaining this petition. The petition is accordingly dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioners to approach the learned trial court with appropriate application/objection. In case fresh bail application is filed by petitioner No. 1 and reply to show cause notice is filed by respondent No. 2 before the learned trial court, the same shall be dealt with by the said court in accordance with law. However, it is provided that petitioner No. 1 shall not be arrested pursuant to non-bailable warrants of arrest issued
P a g e | 3 CRM (M) No. 352/2025 CrlM No. 840/2025
against him for a period of ten days from today so as to enable him to approach the learned trial court.
(Sanjay Dhar)
Judge
SRINAGAR 30.06.2025 Aasif