Srinagar, Nov 12: The Jammu Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by three accused, including a mother and her two sons, in a terror-related case registered in Kathua, holding that the investigation was completed within the statutory period and that they were not entitled to default bail.

A Division Bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Yash Paul Bourney rejected the appeal filed by Raiz (24), Younis (21) and their mother Meema (60), challenging the February 28, 2026 order of the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu, which had denied them default bail.
The judgment was pronounced on October 21, 2026.
The case relates to FIR No. 61/2025, registered on March 28, 2025, under various provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Explosive Substances Act and Arms Act. The accused were arrested on April 28, 2025, while the charge-sheet was filed on October 25, 2025.
The appellants, represented by Advocate Irfan Khan, argued that the charge-sheet was incomplete as the investigating agency had acknowledged that certain aspects, including alleged links with slain and absconding terrorists, were still under investigation.
Relying on the Supreme Court's judgment in Ritu Chhabaria v. Union of India, the counsel contended that an incomplete charge-sheet cannot be used to defeat an accused person's statutory right to default bail.
However, the High Court observed that paragraph 18.4 of the charge-sheet clearly recorded that offences under Sections 13 and 19 of the UAPA stood established against the accused.
The Bench held that the possibility of filing a supplementary charge-sheet did not, by itself, establish that the original investigation was incomplete.
"Merely mentioning that investigating agency was still investigating and trying to establish the links between the appellants and the slain/absconding terrorists does not make out a case to project that investigation was incomplete," the court observed.
After examining the charge-sheet, witness statements, electronic and forensic evidence, call detail records and other material, the court concluded that the investigation into the alleged offences had been completed within the prescribed period.
The Bench also declined to grant bail on merits, finding no grounds to interfere with the trial court's decision.
Dismissing the appeal, the High Court directed the trial court to proceed with the case expeditiously.
The State Investigating Agency was represented by Priyanka Bhat, assisting counsel to Senior Additional Advocate General Monika Kohli.