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. 2562 of 2024 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Krishan Kumar Verma, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. B.N. Molakhi, D.A.G. for the State of Uttarakhand. 2. This first bail application has been moved by the applicant, seeking regular bail in F.I.R. No. 38 of 2024, under Sections 8/20/60 of N.D.P.S. Act, registered at Police Station Bhatraujkhan, District Almora. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that there is no independent witness to corroborate the recovery of the alleged contraband; that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the case; that the compliance of Section 50 of NDPS Act has not been made in letter and spirit and that the inventory report was prepared on the spot on 05.10.2024, in which, FIR No. 38 of 2024 was mentioned, whereas the FIR was registered on 07.10.2024 at 16:05 hours. 4. Learned State Counsel, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the bail application. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 6. At this juncture, it is necessary to reproduce Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The same reads as under:- “37. Offences to be cognizable and non bailable— (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)— (a) every offence punishable under this Act shall be cognizable; (b) no person accused of an offence punishable for offences under section 19 or section 24 or section 27A and also for offences involving commercial quantity shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless— (i) the Public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity to oppose the application for such release, and (ii) where the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. (2) The limitations on granting of bail specified in clause (b) of sub-section (1) are in addition to the limitations under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or any other law for the time being in force, on granting of bail.” 7. Section 37 of the NDPS Act is a very rigorous provision. As per Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the conditions which the Court has to examine are that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. 8. In response to this, learned counsel for the applicant submits that no doubt, as per Section 37 of the Act, bail in such cases may not be granted, unless the Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. But, denial of bail does not give unfettered liberty to the prosecution to keep a person in custody without conducting a trial. 9. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant is in jail since 05.10.024 and, it is apparent that no independent witness of recovery is there and moreover, the inventory of recovery, which was prepared on the spot on 05.10.2024, FIR number is mentioned in it, whereas, it is admitted fact that FIR was registered on 07.10.024. Furthermore, on perusal of the G.D. entry, it is revealed that no entry of entering the FIR number in the inventory report is mentioned. Thus, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 10. Having considered the submissions, under the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 11. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 12. Let the applicant – Rajeev Rawat be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject 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. 13. It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail. (Alok Mahra, J.) 07.08.2025 Ujjwal