2025:UHC:6415 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. 80 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. M.S. Pal, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Apoorv Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned A.G.A. with Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. The present applicant ‘Reema @ Roma’ wife of Late Amrish Chauhan is praying for bail in relation to First Information Report dated 04.01.2025 bearing FIR No. 0014 of 2025 P.S. Ranipur, District Haridwar, wherein, the present applicant and her husband Amrish Chauhan were implicated for the offence punishable under Section 8/21 of NDPS Act. 4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and she is the house wife and the applicant’s husband is also implicated, who was also a practicing doctor and enlarged on bail by the Special Judge, NDPS, Haridwar on 13.01.2025 but unfortunately he died on 11.02.2025. 5. Mr. M.S. Pal also argued that the alleged recovered prohibited drugs though are commercial one but the inventory of the recovery was not prepared in the prescribed Form 4 under 2022 Rules and furthermore there is no proper certification by the Magistrate. He also submits that though the non- compliance of Section 52A of the NDPS Act is not fatal and will not vitiate the trial, however, this aspect can be looked into for considering the bail. 6. Apart from this, learned counsel for the applicant also submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and here in this case as per the prosecution itself the applicant’s husband was the main accused and he was granted bail on 13.01.2025, therefore, the applicant deserves bail on this account also. Apart from this, Mr. M.S. Pal also argued that the applicant is the housewife, therefore she also deserves for privilege to get bail in terms of Section 480 of BNSS, 2023. He argued that detail objection has also been filed and earlier she was granted short term bail on the ground that the applicant’s husband died and the short term bail 2025:UHC:6415 was honoured by the present applicant. 7. He further argued that since the twin conditions as stipulated under Section 37 are not complied with, therefore, the applicant deserves for bail. 8. On the other side, learned A.G.A. submits that in terms of Section 37 of the NDPS Act since the recovered prohibited drugs are commercial one therefore the applicant does not deserves for bail but he has not disputed this fact that the main accused as per the prosecution was the applicant’s husband, who was already bailed out by the Trial Court on 13.01.2025 but unfortunately he died later on during bail and furthermore the applicant has no previous criminal history. Apart from this, he fairly submits that the applicant being a house wife is also deserve of the privilege in terms of Section 480 of BNSS, 2023. 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 of the NDPS Act since the inventory is not strictly in the prescribed Form 4 under 2022 Rules and furthermore there is no proper certification though it will not vitiate the trial but is a deciding factor for considering the bail application, this court is of the view that there are the reasonable ground that the applicant is not involved in the offence as alleged and furthermore the applicant has no previous criminal history and is a housewife, therefore, this court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 10. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case the bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant ‘Reema @ Roma’ be released on bail on furnishing her personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 22.07.2025 PR 2025:UHC:6415