J&K&L High Court Grants Bail To Former MLA & Councillor Accused Of Leading Mob That Set Fire To BJP Office & Police Vehicle
The Court noted that continued detention for leading mob that set fire to the BJP office & police vehicle was no longer necessary to secure the ends of justice.
Justice Mohammad Yousuf Wani, Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reaffirming the ‘bail not jail’ doctrine, has granted bail to Smanla Dorje Nurboo, sitting Councillor and Deldan Namgail, former MLA, holding that since the investigation is largely complete, the continued detention of the accused for leading a mob that set fire to the BJP office and police vehicles injuring a CRPF personnel, is no longer necessary to secure the ends of justice.
It noted that while the charges involving arson and rioting are serious, the law must lean toward personal liberty unless there is a clear risk of the accused fleeing or tampering with evidence. The Court noted that the petitioners had already spent seven months in custody and that their social standing should not be used as a double-edged sword to deny them the protection of standard legal principles governing bail.
Justice Mohd Yousuf Wani observed, “…The necessary arrests subject to the law of bails as provided under the Code, BNSS and the provisions of different special Legislations are permissible under the Constitution of our Country by way of a reasonable exception to the fundamental right to liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and the mandate of the provisions of Article 22 of the Constitution is meant to be followed upon making any such necessary arrests”.
Advocate A P Singh appeared for the petitioner and Vishal Sharma, DSGI appeared for the respondent.
In the matter, a violent escalation of a hunger strike at NDS Park, Leh, took place on September 24, 2025. It was alleged that a peaceful assembly was transformed into a violent mob of thousands, armed with rods and sticks. The mob reportedly engaged in heavy stone-pelting, causing injuries to police and CRPF personnel.
The violence peaked when the mob targeted the BJP office in Leh, setting the building ablaze along with several private and official vehicles, including a police vehicle (LA-02/0746) and the official vehicle of the Dy. SP D.A.R. (LA-02/2153). Furthermore, an AK-47 magazine was allegedly snatched from a security official during the chaos.
The petitioners were arrested for their alleged roles in instigating the mob, and their bail applications were previously rejected by the Principal Sessions Judge, Leh, on the grounds that their influential positions might allow them to subvert the trial and because of the severe nature of the damage caused to public and political property.
The Court observed that the primary object of bail is to ensure the presence of the accused at trial, not to inflict early punishment. The Court found that there was no substantial evidence provided by the prosecution to suggest that the petitioners, despite their influence, would interfere with the ongoing trial.
“The petitioners/accused have not been so far shown involvement in any offence carrying the punishment of death or imprisonment for life in alternative which offences attract the bar in terms of provisions of Section 480(1)(i) BNS. The petitioners/accused are not alleged to have committed the offence of murder or culpable homicide not amounting to murder punishable under Sections 103 and 105 BNS respectively”, the Bench noted.
“It is also well settled that the bar imposed under section 480 of BNSS on the exercise of the discretion in the matters of bail subject to proviso contained in the section, is confined to the offences carrying a sentence of death or imprisonment for life in alternative and the offences carrying a sentence of imprisonment for life disjunctive of death sentence are exempted from the embargo”, it further noted.
The Court directed the release of the petitioners upon furnishing a personal bond of ₹50,000 each with one surety of like amount. The bail is subject to conditions including non-interference with witnesses, regular attendance at trial, and a restriction on leaving the country without prior judicial permission.
Cause Title: Smanla Dorje Nurboo & Anr. v. Union Territory of Ladakh Bail App No. 316/2025
Appearances:
Petitioners: A P Singh, Deachan Angmo, and Nikhil Verma, Advocates.
Respondent: Vishal Sharma, DSGI, Eishaan Dadhichi, CGSC.