Jammu and Kashmir High Court
Bail App/99/2025 of UNION TERRITORY THROUGH POLICE STATION BANDIPORA (HOME) Vs YOUNIS SHABIR GANIE on 27 December 2025
8 Regular Cause List IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR Bail App. No. 99/2025 UT of J&K through P/S Bandipora …Appellant/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Jahingeer Ahmad Dar, GA Vs. Younis Shabir Ganie ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Ruaani Ahmad Baba, Advocate
S. No. 8
Regular Cause List
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
Bail App. No. 99/2025
UT of J&K through P/S Bandipora
…Appellant/Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Jahingeer Ahmad Dar, GA
Vs.
Younis Shabir Ganie
...Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Ruaani Ahmad Baba, Advocate
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL, 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.
O R D E R
27.12.2025
1. The present petition challenges the order dated 08.11.2024 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bandipora, in the matter of Younis Shabir Ganie vs. UT of J&K. By virtue of the impugned order, the respondent was admitted to bail subject to certain terms and conditions.
2. The prosecution’s case, as emerging from the record, is that on 21.06.2024, Police Station Bandipora received a written docket from the Incharge Naka Party, PSI Ovais Abdullah. It was stated therein that while performing Naka duty, the police party observed an individual approaching from Nabirpora towards Nasoo. Upon noticing the police presence, the individual attempted to retreat but was intercepted and apprehended. The individual was identified as Younis Shabir Ganie, S/o Shabir Ahmad Ganie, R/o Bandipora. A personal search of the accused led to the recovery of 128 capsules of Spasmo- Proxyvon Plus (16 strips of 8 capsules each) from the pocket of his trousers.
3. Consequent to the recovery, the respondent was booked for offences under Sections 8/22 of the NDPS Act. He was arrested on 21.06.2024 and remained in custody until he was granted bail by the learned Trial Court vide the order dated 08.11.2024, which is now under assail.
4. The primary contention raised by the petitioners is that the learned Trial Court failed to appreciate the gravity of the offence. Conversely, the record indicates that the quantity of the psychotropic substance recovered from the respondent does not fall within the category of 'commercial quantity'. Consequently, the stringent rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which restrict the grant of bail in cases involving commercial quantities, are not attracted in the present instance.
5. A perusal of the material on record confirms that the contraband seized is of an intermediate quantity. In such cases, the standard principles governing the grant of bail apply, rather than the heightened thresholds of Section 37.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances, the reasoning adopted by the learned Trial Court in admitting the respondent to bail does not suffer from any legal infirmity, perversity, or error of jurisdiction that would warrant interference by this Court in its revisional/extraordinary jurisdiction.
7. Finding no merit in the petition, the same is accordingly dismissed.
(VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL)
JUDGE
SRINAGAR 27.12.2025 Manzoor