2025:UHC:5453 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. 201 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. M.S. Pal, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. Amreen Bano, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The present applicant ‘Iqrar’ S/o Abrar is praying for regular bail in relation to First Information Report dated 10.11.2024 bearing FIR No. 286 of 2024 P.S. Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar, wherein, the present applicant has been implicated for the offences punishable under Section 8/20 r/w Section 60 of NDPS Act. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and is languishing in jail since 11.11.2024 and have no previous criminal history. He further submits that the alleged contraband as shown to be recovered from the present applicant is 1 kg 16 gms of charas, which is a non- commercial quantity and in such an eventuality Section 37 of the NDPS Act will come into his way. 5. In reference to Section 37 learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to the prosecution this is a chance recovery but the inventory so prepared is not strictly in terms of Section 52-A of the NDPS Act r/w Rule 8 of the Rules of 2022. He further submits that the inventory infact is not strictly in the prescribed Form-4 under Rule 8 of 2022 Rules and furthermore there is no proper certification since in the inventory there is an endorsement of the seen of the concerned Magistrate. He submits that merely by making an endorsement in the inventory itself reveals that no separate application was moved along with the inventory report for seeking certification of inventory. 6. He further submits that non-compliance of Section 52A of the NDPS Act will not vitiate the trial but this aspect can be looked into while 2025:UHC:5453 considering the bail application. In reference to this, Mr. M.S. Pal placed before this court the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Bharat Aambale vs. State of Chhatisgarh 2025 INSC 78, which was also followed by this court in the Bail Application No. 513 of 2025 ‘Pankaj Singh Kunwar vs. State of Uttarakhand’ decided on 22.05.2025. 7. By referring the aforesaid judgment, learned counsel for the applicant submits that since there is no proper substantial compliance of Section 52A of the NDPS Act, which is evident from the inventory report as well as its certification which itself reveals that there are the reasonable grounds that the applicant is not involved in the said offence. 8. Apart from this, he submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and if the applicant is bailed out there is no any such possibility that he will involve in such activity in future. 9. On the other side, learned State counsel have raised objection that in terms of Section 37 of the NDPS Act the applicant does not deserve for bail since the alleged contraband, which is shown to be recovered from the present applicant, is commercial one. In respect of the criminal antecedent learned A.G.A. has not disputed on this that the applicant has no previous criminal history. 10. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and further on perusal of the inventory and its certification, this court is primarily of the view that there is no proper substantial compliance of Section 52A of the NDPS Act and, therefore, this aspect can be looked into while considering the bail application and as such this court is of the view that the applicant prima facie is not involved in the offence as alleged. So far as the criminal antecedents are concerned admittedly the applicant has no previous criminal history, therefore, if the applicant is bailed out then there is less possibility that he will involve in such an activity in future. 11. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case the bail 2025:UHC:5453 application is allowed. 12. Let the applicant ‘Iqrar’ be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 13. Apart from this, it is also made clear that the Trial Court may proceed with the Trial without being influenced with the observations as made above. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 26.06.2025 PR 2025:UHC:5453