2025:UHC:7023 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1 No. 56 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mrs. Radha Arya, learned counsel holding the brief of Mr. Raj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The present applicant ‘Talib Khan’ S/o Shaheed Khan is praying for bail in a reference to First Information Report dated 14.11.2024 bearing FIR No. 717 of 2024, P.S. Patel Nagar, District Dehradun, wherein, the present applicant has been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 8/21 r/w Section 29 of NDPS Act. 4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the alleged contraband Smack, which is shown to be recovered from the applicant, is a commercial quantity i.e. 261 grams, however, there is no substantial compliance of the mandatory provision of NDPS Act particularly Section 52A. She submits that in this particular case at the time of search and seizure neither any inventory was prepared nor there is any certification. She also submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history. She further submits that since the alleged contraband, which is shown to be recovered is a commercial quantity, therefore, the twin condition as stipulated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act has to be dealt with and in this regard she submits that non- compliance of Section 52A of the NDPS Act is not fatal and will not vitiate the trial but this aspect can be looked into while considering the bail application. 5. In support of this, she submits that since there is no inventory and no certification and the evidence collected under Section 52A of the NDPS Act are the primary evidences, therefore, there is reasonable ground that the applicant is not involved in the said offence. 6. Apart from this, she submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and if 2025:UHC:7023 at this stage the applicant is bailed out there is no possibility that he will misuse the bail. 7. She further submits that a detailed counter affidavit has been filed by the prosecution from which it clearly reveals that there is no inventory and furthermore they have not disputed about the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal history. 8. On the other side, on written instructions, Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. fairly submits that in this particular case no inventory was prepared, therefore, there is no certification and prima-facie it appears that there is no proper compliance of Section 52A of the NDPS Act, but he also submits that non-compliance of Section 52A will not vitiate the trial though this aspect may be considered for bail. He has also not disputed that the applicant has no previous criminal history. 9. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that there is no proper substantial compliance of Section 52A particularly since no inventory was prepared, therefore, this court is of the view that there are the reasonable grounds that the applicant is not involved in the said offence and furthermore the applicant has no previous criminal history. 10. In view of the discussion as made above, since the twin conditions as stipulated under Section 37 has been fully complied with, therefore, this court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 11. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case the bail application is allowed. 12. Let the applicant ‘Talib Khan’ be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 11.08.2025 PR 2025:UHC:7023