2025:UHC:9618 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS 31.10.2025 BA1/1547/2025 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Karan Singh Dugtal, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned Deputy A.G. along with Mr. Dinesh Chauhan, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Applicant – Mohd. Ikram, who is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime/F.I.R. No. 32 of 2025, under Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short N.D.P.S. Act) registered at Police Station Haldwani District Nainital, has sought his release on bail. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that on 02.02.2025, an F.I.R. was registered under Sections 8/22/60 of the NDPS Act alleging that, during routine checking, the co-accused was apprehended and a narcotic substance was recovered from his possession. It is submitted that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R.; he was not arrested on the spot and was picked up later the same day from his shop where he makes candles. His implication is solely on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused, namely, Jainual Aabdin. 6. It is further submitted that in the F.I.R. registered at P.S. Banbhoolpura, District Nainital on the same basis, a Coordinate Bench of this Court has already granted bail to the applicant. The main accused, Jainual Aabdin, has also 2025:UHC:9618 been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 16.10.2025; that, the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated; that he has been arrested only on the basis of presumption, and therefore, the principle of presumption of innocence must operate in his favour until proved guilty by a competent court. 7. It is further submitted that the applicant is in judicial custody since 03.02.2025; that, his bail application was rejected by the court below vide order dated 20.02.2025; that he is a permanent resident of District Nainital and thus there is no possibility of his absconding; and that the trial is likely to take considerable time. Hence, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 8. Per contra, learned State counsel would vehemently oppose the bail application. However, he fairly admits that the name of the applicant surfaced only on the basis of the confessional statement of co-accused Jainual Aabdin, who has been granted bail by this Court; that, the applicant has also been granted bail by the Coordinate Bench in respect of the F.I.R. registered against him; that, the applicant is in custody since 03.02.2025 and his bail application has been rejected by the court below. 9. Having considered the rival submissions and upon perusal of the material on record, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 10. Accordingly, the 1st bail application is allowed on the following conditions:- (a) The applicant shall execute a personal bond and furnish two reliable sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. (b) The applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the 2025:UHC:9618 court. (c) The applicant shall appear before the investigating officer as and when required and cooperate with the investigation. (d) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence or witnesses, either directly or indirectly and shall not indulge in any criminal activity while on bail. (e) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the court or to the investigating agency, to preclude risk of absconding. 11. The bail granted to the applicant shall be liable to be cancelled in the event of any violation of the aforesaid conditions or if the applicant is found to have misused the liberty granted to him. [ (Alok Mahra, J.) 31.10.2025 Mamta