2025:UHC:9345 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA2 No. 239 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Additional Advocate General with Mr. Deepak Bhadwaj and Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holders for the State. 3. The first bail application of the present applicant was converted to short term bail since the father of the applicant died and he was granted short term bail for a period of six weeks. On completion of the period of short term bail the applicant surrendered and now is in jail. 4. Now, the instant second bail application has been moved by the applicant ‘Chaman Singh’ S/o Shri Chandan Singh praying for bail in reference to First Information Report dated 19.05.2025 bearing FIR No. 217 of 2025 P.S. Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar, wherein, the applicant has been implicated for the offence punishable under Section 8/22 of the NDPS Act. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and infact the applicant’s son Yash Kumar was the proprietor of Yash Medical Store, who was given licence to sell, stock or distribute wholesale drugs as specified in Schedule C, C(1) and X of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act. He submits that though the applicant is not the proprietor and the proprietor of the firm is the son; however, the applicant has been implicated only on the ground that the bills with regard to the recovered drugs has not been shown. 6. Mr. Saurabh Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, further submits that the drugs, which has been shown to be recovered though have a commercial quantity but infact the applicant’s son was having the licence to sell those drugs as specified in Schedules, therefore, no offence is made out. He further submits that though the 2025:UHC:9345 inventory was prepared but infact it was not properly certified by the Magistrate concerned since only the endorsement of seen put thereon, therefore there is no substantial compliance of Section 52A of the NDPS Act and as such there are reasonable grounds that the applicant is not indulged in this offence. 7. He further argued that the applicant have no previous criminal history and if the applicant is enlarged on bail there is no any such possibility that he will indulge in any such activity particularly when the applicant’s son is having the licence to sell the drugs as shown to be recovered. He submits that since the twin conditions as stipulated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act are complied with therefore the applicant deserves for bail. 8. On the other side, learned State counsel argued that non-compliance of Section 52 A of the NDPS Act is not fatal and will not vitiate the trial but fairly submits that this aspect can be looked into while considering the bail application. He further submits that at the time of recovery the applicant have not shown the invoices though he has not disputed that the applicant’s son was having the licence to sell the drugs as specified in Schedule C, C(1) and X of Drugs and Cosmetics Act. 9. Apart from this, he has not disputed that the applicant has no previous criminal history. 10. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the applicant’s son being the proprietor of Yash Medical Store was having the licence to sell, stock and distribute the drugs as specified in Schedule, which includes drugs, which has shown to be recovered and furthermore the inventory was certified by the Magistrate concerned only by putting seal thereon and furthermore the applicant has no previous criminal history, therefore, this court is of the view that since the twin conditions as stipulated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act are fulfilled, therefore, the applicant deserves for bail. 11. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case the bail 2025:UHC:9345 application is allowed. 12. Let the applicant ‘Chaman Singh’ be released on bail on furnishing the personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 13. It is made clear that the Trial Court may proceed with the trial without being influenced with the observations as made above. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 16.10.2025 PR