Court Emphasizes Judicial Discretion and Personal Liberty in Granting Bail Amid Allegations of Incitement and Violence
In a significant judgment, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court has granted bail to Smanla Dorje Nurboo and Deldan Namgail, two prominent political figures implicated in a high-profile riot case in Leh, Ladakh. The case, FIR No. 144/2025, involved serious charges under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, among other laws, following a violent protest that erupted on September 24, 2025, leading to extensive damage to public and private property and the loss of four lives.
The Court, presided over by Judge Mohd Yousuf Wani, emphasized the principle that bail is a rule and its denial an exception in non-bailable offenses that do not carry a sentence of death or life imprisonment. The Court noted that the accused had not been shown to have committed offenses attracting such severe penalties, and the investigation did not necessitate their custodial interrogation.
The judgment highlighted the importance of balancing individual liberty with societal interests, stating that judicial discretion in bail matters should be exercised on sound legal principles. The Court imposed several conditions to ensure the accused's cooperation with the investigation and to prevent any potential tampering with evidence or absconding.
The prosecution had opposed the bail, arguing that the accused, due to their influential positions as a former MLA and a sitting councilor, could impede the investigation and pose a threat to public order. However, the Court found no substantial evidence to justify the continued detention of the accused, especially since a preliminary charge sheet had already been filed.
The Court's decision is notable for its adherence to established legal principles regarding bail and the protection of personal liberty, as articulated in various Supreme Court judgments. The bail was granted with conditions including restrictions on international travel and mandates for cooperation with law enforcement.
The legal community is closely monitoring the case, given its implications for the exercise of judicial discretion in politically sensitive cases and its potential impact on future bail applications in similar circumstances.
Bottom Line:
Bail in non-bailable offences under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Judicial discretion to grant bail must consider factors such as absence of proximity between the accused's actions and alleged crime, absence of custodial interrogation necessity, no evidence of tampering or absconding, and balancing personal liberty with societal interests.
Statutory provision(s): Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Sections 3(5), 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 57, 61(2), 109, 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 118(2), 121(1), 121(2), 125, 132, 135, 152, 189(2), 189(3), 189(4), 189(5), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 192, 195, 238(b), 303(2), 309(4), 309(6), 324(2), 324(3), 324(4), 324(5), 324(6), 326(e), 326(f), 326(g), 332(b); Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 Section 3(1).4; Arms Act, 1959 Section 25(1AB).
Smanla Dorje Nurboo v. Union Territory of Ladakh, (Jammu And Kashmir) : Law Finder Doc id # 2884907
