2025:UHC:9251 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.1866 of 2025 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. G.D. Joshi, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Akshay Latwal, A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand. 2. This first bail application has been moved by the applicant seeking regular bail in Case Crime/F.I.R. No.429 of 2025, under Section 8/ 18 of N.D.P.S. Act, registered at Police Station Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar. 3. An F.I.R. was lodged by the complainant, inter alia, alleging that on 26.08.2025, the police party apprehended the applicant and recovered 458 grams of opium from his possession. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and is languishing in judicial custody since 27.08.2025. It is submitted that the alleged recovery is wholly fabricated and planted upon the applicant and, even otherwise, the recovered contraband is below the threshold of commercial quantity. It is further submitted that the alleged place of occurrence is situated in a densely populated and commercial area, yet no independent or public witness was associated with the recovery proceedings as required under Section 180 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). Learned counsel further submits that the mandatory procedural safeguards contemplated under Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 were not adhered to during the search and seizure operation, thereby rendering the entire proceedings vitiated. It is also submitted that the applicant undertakes not to misuse the liberty of bail, if granted, and shall furnish adequate sureties to the satisfaction of the Court. 2025:UHC:9251 5. Learned State Counsel, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that the present case pertains to a chance recovery made during lawful police proceedings. 6. On the previous occasion, this Court had directed the learned State Counsel to obtain instructions regarding the criminal antecedents of the applicant. Today, on instructions, learned State Counsel submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history. 7. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion as to the final merits of the case, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves bail at this stage on the ground of parity. 8. The bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant, namely, Khempal be released on bail, on executing personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of like amount, to the satisfaction of Court concerned, subject to the following conditions: (i) The applicant shall attend the trial Court regularly, and, he will not seek any unnecessary adjournment. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case. (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without any prior permission of the Trial Court. It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the complainant/ informant will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail. (Alok Mahra, J.) 15.10.2025 Arpan ARPAN JAISWAL Digitally signed by ARPAN JAISWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c04853654 45e3a20dddb7393398f9fe45ba3e, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68D9D454 C5109CB987446351E4DF04AADAA2C2CEA66, cn=ARPAN JAISWAL Date: 2025.10.15 17:29:06 +05'30' 2025:UHC:9251