2025:UHC:4181 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/118/2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. B. M. Pingal and Ms. Sarita Bisht, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned Assistant Government Advocate for the State. 3. Present applicant ‘Sukhvinder @ Bittu’ is praying for regular bail in relation to First Information Report dated 29.12.2024 bearing FIR No. 235 of 2024, Police Station – Nanakmatta, District – Udham Singh Nagar wherein present applicant has been implicated for the offences punishable under Section 109 BNS, under Section 8 / 21 / 60 of the NDPS Act and under Section 3 /25 of the Arms Act. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and the alleged contraband smack, which is shown to be recovered from the present applicant, is 123 gram, which is much below the commercial quantity. He further submits that there is no proper compliance of mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act and applicant is languishing in jail since 30.12.2024. He further submits that charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation. In paragraph 10 of the bail application, it is stated that applicant was never convicted but he has not disclosed about the criminal history of the applicant. 5. On the other side, learned State Counsel has seriously opposed the bail application and submits that applicant has been implicated earlier in three criminal cases and one of which is relating to NDPS Act and other two cases related to other penal provisions. On this, Mr. 2025:UHC:4181 B.M. Pingal, pointed out that in those cases, applicant is already bailed out. 6. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant and in other criminal cases, applicant is already bailed out, therefore, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves for bail but keeping in view the past history of the applicant, this Court is imposing some stringent condition. 7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant ‘‘Sukhvinder @ Bittu” be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following condition: i. After being released on bail, applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, within a week. ii. After being released on bail, applicant shall report to the nearest police station in every 15 days and the SHO concerned shall record his presence. iii. If the applicant is found to be indulged in similar criminal activity, then the prosecution is free to move bail cancellation application forthwith. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 20.05.2025. SKS