Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 11887 (UTT)

BABITA SHARMA v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

BA1/1828/2025 · 2025-10-17

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:9385 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. 1827 of 2025 BA1 No. 1828 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Prince Chauhan, learned counsel holding the brief of Mr. Shariq Khurshid, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mrs. Meenakshi Sharma, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. These two bail applications have been moved by the applicants namely Smt. Paramjeet Kaur W/o Satnam Singh and Smt. Babita Sharma W/o Saurabh Sharma, praying for bail in reference to first information report dated 04.09.2025 bearing FIR No. 328 of 2025 P.S. Ramnagar, District Nainital, wherein, both the applicants have been implicated for the offence punishable under Section 8/20 of NDPS Act. 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicants that both the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated and the alleged contraband, which is shown to be recovered is non-commercial and there is no proper substantial compliance of the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act. 5. Apart from this, he submits that even otherwise there is no any scientific report with regard to the contraband whether contraband is ganja or not. He further submits that both the applicants have no previous criminal history and are languishing in jail since 05.09.2025. 6. On the other side, learned Brief Holder Mrs. Meenakshi Sharma have not disputed that the contraband, which is shown to be recovered from both the applicants is a non-commercial quantity. 7. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the alleged contraband, which is shown to be recovered are non-commercial and furthermore both the applicants have no previous criminal history as contended in paragraph 13 of the bail application, this court is of the view that 2025:UHC:9385 both the applicants deserves for bail. 8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case both the bail applications are allowed. 9. Let the applicants namely Paramajeet Kaur and Babita Sharma be released on bail on furnishing their personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 17.10.2025 PR