Mukesh Kumar vs Union Territory Of J & K
2023 Latest Caselaw 217 j&K

                                                                         Sr. No. 11



       HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                        ATJAMMU


                                                 Bail App No. 207/2022


Mukesh Kumar                                                       .....Petitioner(s)

                               Through :- Mr. G S Thakur, Advocate


                        v/s

Union Territory of J & K                                         .....Respondent(s)

                               Through :- Mr. Sumeet Bhatia, GA


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M A CHOWDHARY, JUDGE

                                   ORDER

09.02.2023

1. Petitioner facing trial in a case arising out of FIR No. 150/2021, registered

at Police Station Udhampur for the commission of offences punishable

under Sections 8/15 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,

1985 (for short 'NDPS Act'), being unsuccessful in his bail application

moved before the Court of learned Sessions Judge Udhampur (for shot

'the trial Court'), has moved this application for grant of bail primarily on

the ground that the petitioner is HIV+ve patient as certified by the doctor.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner while arguing the case for a while

mentioned a judgment passed by this Court in case titled "Jasvinder

Singh vs State of J&K", reported as 2022(1) JKJ 28 [HC], whereby in

similar circumstances the petitioner suffering from HIV+ve, was granted

bail.

3. The petitioner has been charged for having in his possession 1.5 Qtl

Poppy Straw which falls within the commercial quantity, as such, rigor of

Section 37 of NDPS Act with regard to bail is applicable in the case. The

petitioner herein while moving application before the trial Court had not

taken the ground of his ailment, as such, the trial Court has not been able

to address on the point of his ailment to consider grant of bail. In the case

relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the trial Court had

already taken a view on medical ground pleaded in the application and

rejected the bail application, therefore, this court was not in a position to

appreciate the problem faced by the petitioner in that case.

4. After arguing for a while, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the petitioner shall be satisfied in case the petition is disposed of with a

direction to the trial Court to consider the matter expeditiously on a

motion for grant of bail by the petitioner taking medical ground in his

petition.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent has stated no objection to the

submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions

urged at the Bar by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this petition is

disposed of with a direction to the trial Court to decide the application

moved, if any, by the petitioner for grant of bail expeditiously preferably

within ten days from the date of filing of such application.

7. Petition is accordingly, disposed of along with application(s), if any.

(M A Chowdhary) Judge

JAMMU 09.02.2023 Vijay

Whether the order is speaking: Yes Whether the order is reportable: Yes