Jammu and Kashmir High Court
CONCR/34/2018 of STATE THROUGH POLICE STATION DRASS (LADAKH CASE) Vs SUNIL KUMAR (LADAKH CASE) on 28 September 2026
No. 17 REGULAR CAUSE LIST HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CONCR No.34/2018 State Through Police Station Drass (Ladakh Case) …Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. T. M. Shamsi, DSGI with Mr. Faizan, CGSC and Ms. Bisma Advocate. Vs. Sunil Kumar (Ladakh Case) ...Respondent(s)
Serial No. 17
REGULAR CAUSE LIST
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
CONCR No.34/2018
State Through Police Station Drass
(Ladakh Case)
…Petitioner(s)
Through:
Mr. T. M. Shamsi, DSGI with
Mr. Faizan, CGSC and
Ms. Bisma Advocate.
Vs.
Sunil Kumar (Ladakh Case)
...Respondent(s)
Through:
None.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
28.09.2026
1. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, it transpires that this Court, in terms of order dated 17th December 2018, has already granted leave to the petitioner to file an acquittal appeal against the judgment passed by the Court of Principal Session Judge, Kargil.
2. Since the appeal was delayed by 72 days, the petitioner had also filed a separate application seeking condonation of delay. The respondent has been summoned on several occasions; however, service could not be effected.
3. Having regard to the fact that the appeal has been filed against a judgment of acquittal passed by Ld. Pr. Sessions Judge, Kargil, and that the filing of such an appeal required prior permission from the competent authority, the delay, in view of the official exigencies arising from the fact that the matter related to the Union Territory of Ladakh, appears to be sufficiently explained. Accordingly, for the reasons recorded in the application, the same is allowed, and the delay of 72 days in filing the acquittal appeal is condoned.
4. Since leave to appeal already stands granted, and upon hearing learned counsel for the appellant, this Court is of the considered view that a case for interference with the judgment of acquittal is made out. Admit appeal to hearing.
5. Issue fresh notice to the respondent, to be served through the Senior Superintendent of Police, Udhampur.
6. The condonation application bearing CONCR No. 34/2018 stands disposed of.
7. The Registry is directed to diarise the main appeal and list the same accordingly.
(Sanjay Parihar)
Judge
SRINAGAR: 28.09.2026 Shaista-PS