High Court says accused booked again under NDPS Act cannot seek bail as a matter of right
15/07/2026
JAMMU, Jul 14: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has declined to directly grant bail to an accused whose earlier bail was cancelled after he was allegedly booked in another case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, while permitting him to approach the trial court with a fresh bail application on the basis of changed circumstances.
Justice Sanjay Dhar passed the order while disposing of a bail application filed by Gulzar Ahmad Allaie through his wife.
The petitioner is facing trial before the Principal Sessions Judge, Kulgam, in connection with FIR No. 71/2021 registered under Sections 8 and 20 of the NDPS Act.
The court noted that the petitioner had been granted bail by the trial court on December 22, 2021, subject to certain conditions, including that he would not indulge in subversive activities or commit a similar offence.
However, during the pendency of the trial, the petitioner was allegedly booked in FIR No. 36/2024 under Sections 8 and 20 of the NDPS Act at Police Station Qaimoh.
Following the registration of the fresh case, the prosecution sought cancellation of his bail, and the trial court cancelled the relief on March 23, 2025.
Instead of challenging the cancellation order, the petitioner directly approached the High Court seeking fresh bail.
Justice Dhar observed that the trial court's order cancelling bail appeared to be justified as the petitioner had allegedly violated a specific condition of the earlier bail order by becoming involved in another NDPS case.
The court, however, noted that the petitioner had remained in custody for more than one year after cancellation of his bail and observed that substantial progress in the trial may have taken place during this period.
Considering the changed circumstances, the High Court granted liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh bail application before the trial court.
The court directed that if such an application is filed, it shall be decided expeditiously, preferably within one month.
Advocate Suhail Ahmad Shah appeared for the petitioner, while Government Advocate Numan Malik represented the Union Territory.
Share This Story |
|
Comment On This Story |
|
|
|
|