2025:UHC:8101 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA 11th SEPTEMBER, 2025 FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO.1649 of 2025 Faizan ..…Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ..…Respondent Counsel for the Applicant : Ms. Rajni Rangwal, Advocate. Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Assistant Government Advocate. Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J. The applicant Faizan is in judicial custody for the offence punishable under Section 8 read with Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, “Act, 1985”) in Case Crime No.340 of 2025, registered at Police Station Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar. 2. According to the First Information Report, the police party recovered 10.40 gm. smack (heroin) from the possession of the applicant on 06.08.2025. 3. Heard Ms. Rajni Rangwal, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned Assistant Government Advocate for the respondent. 4. Ms. Rajni Rangwal, Advocate, contended that 1 2025:UHC:8101 the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. Nothing was recovered from his possession. The alleged recovery was planted. There was no independent witness at the time of the alleged recovery. This fact also makes the police story doubtful. The alleged recovered contraband is below from commercial quantity. Applicant is not a convicted person. He is a permanent resident of District Udham Singh Nagar, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding, and, he is in custody since 06.08.2025. 5. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Assistant Government Advocate, has opposed the bail application orally. 6. As per Table prepared in terms of Section 2 (xxiii-a) and Section 2 (vii-a) of the Act, 1985, 5 gm of heroin is small quantity and greater than 250 gm is commercial quantity (Entry No.56). 7. The object of keeping the accused in detention during the investigation is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused. 8. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the 2 2025:UHC:8101 view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage. 9. The Bail Application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant – Faizan be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. ___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J. Dt:11.09.2025 Shiv/ 3