[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Sunil Kumar Singh vs Ut Of J&K on 2 February, 2026
Sr. No. 25
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
Bail App No. 330/2025
CrlM No. 2265/2025
Sunil Kumar Singh ..... Petitioner(s)/ Appellant(s)
q
Through: Mr. Sanchit Verma, Advocate
vs
UT of J&K ..... Respondent(s)
Through: None
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SEKHRI, JUDGE
ORDER
02.02.2026
01. Petitioner has invoked Section 483 BNSS for bail, in FIR No.29/2025,
registered with Police Station, GRP, Jammu, under Sections 8/20 of
NDPS Act, after a similar plea came to be declined by learned Sessions
Judge/Special Judge (NDPS Cases), Jammu, ["the trial Court"].
02. As prosecution story would unfurl, on 23.07.2025, a docket was flashed
by Incharge Naka Party to the Police Station stating, inter alia that
during patrolling at Platform No.01, Railway Station, Jammu and
reached near Kathua End, Railway Station, they spotted suspicious
movement of a person carrying a grey coloured bag. He was
apprehended and when enquired he disclosed his name as Sunil Kumar
Singh- the petitioner herein. Three packets containing 'Ganja' like
substance, wrapped with khakhi cello tape came to be recovered from
his bag and he failed to furnish satisfactory reply. On the receipt of this
docket, FIR came to be registered.
03. During investigation, alleged contraband was weighed. Packet 01 was
2.050 kg, packet 02 was 1.020 kg and packet 03 was 1.012 kg in weight.
Total weight of three packets was found 4.082 kg, which came to be
seized and sealed in the presence of witnesses. Samples were extracted
and sent to FSL for chemical examination and as per the FSL report, the
contraband recovered from the possession of the petitioner was
identified as Ganja. It also surfaced during investigation that applicant
was a habitual offender as he also involved in a case of like nature in
Bihar.
04. The petitioner seeks his enlargement on bail primarily on the ground
that investigation of the case has already culminated in the presentation
of charge-sheet, he stands charged by the trial Court and conclusion of
trial is likely to take considerable time. It is also urged that alleged
contraband recovered in the present case being intermediate quantity,
bar under Section 37 NDPS Act is not attracted.
05. The petition has been opposed on the other side predominantly on the
ground of gravity of the charge and that petitioner is a habitual offender.
06. Gravity of the charge and criminal antecedents of accused are, no doubt
relevant considerations while considering a bail plea, but it cannot be
reckoned as the only factor. A bail order must reflect a balance between
conflicting interests of shielding the society from the hazards of
criminals and absolute adherence to the cardinal principle of criminal
jurisprudence regarding presumption of innocence of an accused until
he is found guilty. Since investigation, in this case, has already
culminated in final report against the applicant and he is behind the bars
for more than six months, the alleged contraband is an intermediate
quantity and the witnesses cited in the charge-sheet are police officials,
no fruitful purpose shall be served with continued incarceration of the
applicant.
07. Hence, present application is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be
released on bail on his furnishing a surety bond in the amount of
Rs.1.00 lac to the satisfaction of learned trial Court and a bond of
personal recognizance of like amount to the satisfaction of
Supreintendent of concerned Jail, subject, however, to the following
conditions:
i. he shall not jump over bail and tamper with the prosecution
evidence;
ii. he shall not leave territorial jurisdiction of the UT of J&K without
prior permission of the trial Court;
iii. he shall not, in any, way, threaten or coerce the prosecution
witnesses; and
iv. he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date of
hearing.
08. Bail Application, accordingly, stands disposed of.
(Rajesh Sekhri)
Judge
Jammu
02.02.2026
Riya Kochhar
