SRINAGAR: The Jammu Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has dismissed an appeal seeking default bail by three residents of Kathua arrested in a case involving alleged offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the Explosive Substances Act and the Arms Act.
A division bench of Justices Yash Paul Bourney and Sanjeev Kumar, in a judgment pronounced on October 21, upheld the trial court’s decision to deny bail, holding that the investigation could not be treated as incomplete merely because police were continuing efforts to establish the accused persons’ alleged links with slain and absconding terrorists.
The appeal was filed by Raiz, 24, Younis, 21, and Meema, 60, all residents of Suffian Bhaddu village in Kathua district and currently lodged in District Jail, Jammu. They had challenged an order dated February 28, 2026, passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu, a designated court under the National Investigation Agency Act.
The case stems from FIR No. 61/2025, registered on March 28, 2025. The three appellants were arrested on April 28, 2025, and the charge-sheet was filed on October 25, 2025, according to the judgment.
The accused argued that the charge-sheet had been filed without completing the investigation, allegedly to prevent them from exercising their right to default bail. Their counsel pointed to a section of the charge-sheet stating that efforts to establish links with slain and absconding terrorists, as well as possible involvement in earlier terror-related incidents in Kathua, were continuing.
The appellants relied on the Supreme Court’s ruling in *Ritu Chhabaria v. Union of India*, which held that an investigating agency cannot file a charge-sheet without completing its investigation merely to defeat an accused person’s right to default bail.
However, the High Court found no grounds to interfere with the trial court’s assessment that the investigation into the offences allegedly committed by the appellants had been completed. It noted that the case material included witness statements, electronic and forensic records and call detail records.
The bench observed that the continuation of inquiries into the accused persons’ alleged links with terrorist networks did not, by itself, establish that the charge-sheet was incomplete. It also agreed with the trial court that the appellants were not entitled to bail on merits in view of the material available against them.
Dismissing the appeal, the High Court directed that a copy of the judgment be sent to the trial court and asked it to proceed with the trial expeditiously.
