SC refuses bail to ex-Kashmir Bar Association president Mian Abdul Qayoom in UAPA case
Directing the AIIMS Jammu medical team to file its report in three weeks, the bench posted the matter for further hearing on March 24
The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to grant bail to former Jammu and Kashmir High Court’s Kashmir Bar Association president Mian Abdul Qayoom in a case registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.
A bench of Justice MM Sundresh and Justice N Kotiswar Singh, however, ordered setting up of a special medical team of doctors from AIIMS Jammu to examine his medical condition to ascertain if he needed to be transferred to Delhi for treatment and palliative care.
Directing the AIIMS Jammu medical team to file its report in three weeks, the bench posted the matter for further hearing on March 24.
The report shall also indicate the facilities available in Jammu and whether there is any need to transfer the petitioner to Delhi for further treatment, it said.
Qayoom has challenged the Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh High Court’s December 16, 2025 order rejecting his bail plea. Bail on medical grounds can be granted only in exceptional cases where adequate treatment can’t be provided in custody, the high court had said.
On behalf of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, Additional Solicitor General Nataraj contended that Qayoom S health condition was stable and that he was being treated at Government Medical College, Jammu.
Describing Qayoom as a 77-year-old man with a single kidney and a pacemaker in his heart, senior counsel S Muralidhar urged the bench on his behalf to consider palliative care for him.
Qayoom was arrested in June 2024 in connection with the murder of advocate Babar Qadri in September 2020. The trial was transferred from Srinagar to a Designated NIA Court at Jammu after the high court concluded that it would not be possible to have a free and fair trial at Srinagar in view of Qayoom’s ‘dominant’ position and influence enjoyed by him.
In August 2025, the trial court framed charges against him under various provisions of the UAPA.
