GULZAR AHMAD ALLAIE TH.HIS WIFE v. UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K TH.S.H.O P/S YARIPORA
Bail App/66/2026 · 2026-07-14
Sanjay Dhar
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1772 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1772 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
7 Regular
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
Bail App 66/2026 CrlM(544/2026)
GULZAR AHMAD ALLAIE TH.HIS WIFE
….. Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Suhail Ahmad Shah, Advocate.
V/s UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K TH.S.H.O P/S YARIPORA ….. Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Numan Malik, GA.
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar, Judge
ORDER 14.07.2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
2. It appears that the petitioner is involved in a case arising out of FIR No. 71/2021 for offences under Section 8/20 of NDPS Act and he is facing trial in the said offence before the court of learned Principal Sessions Judge, Kulgam. It also appears that during the pendency of the charge sheet, the petitioner was enlarged on bail by the learned trial court in terms of order dated 22.12.2021
P a g e | 2 Bail App 66/2026 CrlM(544/2026)
subject to several conditions including the condition that the petitioner shall not indulge in subversive activities or repeat any such offence.
3. The record shows that the petitioner was again booked in FIR No. 36/2024 for offence under Section 8/20 of NDPS Act registered with Police Station Qaimoh. When this fact was brought to the notice of the learned trial court by the prosecution by filing an application for cancellation of bail, the learned trial court passed order dated 23.03.2025 whereby bail granted to the petitioner was cancelled. The petitioner has not assailed the said order but has approached this Court directly for grant of bail.
4. The order whereby bail of the petitioner has been cancelled, appears to be well founded because the condition on which the petitioner was granted bail has been violated inasmuch as he is alleged to have indulged in an offence under NDPS Act. The petitioner, it seems, after cancellation of the bail has been in custody for more than one year. Therefore, during the interregnum, there must have been substantial progress in the trial of the case.
P a g e | 3 Bail App 66/2026 CrlM(544/2026)
Therefore, the petitioner may do well to again file application for grant of bail before the trial court in view of the changed circumstances.
5. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the trial court with an application for grant of bail on fresh grounds in view of the changed circumstances. As and when such an application is made by the petitioner before the learned trial court, the same shall be disposed of by the said court most expeditiously preferably within one month.
6. Disposed of as above.
(Sanjay Dhar)
Judge
SRINAGAR 14.07.2026 Aasif