2025:UHC:9027 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA 10th OCTOBER, 2025 FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1903 of 2025 Sanjay Kumar ..…Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ..…Respondent Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Naveen Singh Bisht, Advocate. Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Pradeep Lohani, Brief Holder. Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J. The applicant – Sanjay Kumar is in judicial custody for the offence punishable under Section 8 read with Section 17 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, “Act, 1985”) in Case Crime No.261 of 2025, registered at Police Station Kankhal, District Haridwar. 2. According to the First Information Report dated 16.09.2025, the applicant was apprehended by the police. He was searched by the police. The police recovered 848 gm. opium from his possession. 3. Heard Mr. Naveen Singh Bisht, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned Brief Holder for respondent. 1 2025:UHC:9027 4. Mr. Naveen Singh Bisht, Advocate, contended that the applicant has been implicated by the police. The alleged contraband was not recovered from his possession. The said recovery was planted. He is an innocent person. There was no independent witness at the time of the alleged recovery. This fact also supports the submission of the applicant. Applicant is not a convicted person. He is a permanent resident of District Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding, and, the alleged recovered contraband is less than commercial quantity. 5. Mr. Pradeep Lohani, Brief Holder, 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, 25 gm. of opium is small quantity and greater than 2.50 kg. is commercial quantity (Entry No.92). 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 2 2025:UHC:9027 opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage. 9. The Bail Application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant – Sanjay Kumar 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: 10.10.2025 Pant/ 3