2025:UHC:1593 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/410/2025 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Ms. Geeta Sajwan, Mr. Siddharth Tomar and Ms. Swaleha Hussain, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The present applicant Suman Devi, W/o Shekhar Thapa is praying for regular bail in relation to FIR dated 24.12.2024, bearing FIR/Case Crime No. 178 of 2024 registered at P.S. Selaqui District Dehradun wherein the present applicant and her husband has been implicated for the offence punishable under Section 8/20 of the NDPS Act. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated, and, furthermore, the alleged contraband shown to be recovered separately from the present applicant and her husband. The alleged contraband which was shown to be recovered from the present applicant was 815 gms., though, the alleged contraband which was shown to be recovered from her husband is above the commercial quantity. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant’s husband is in jail in relation to the said offence. She further submits that there is no compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act. 5. Apart from this, learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is a lady and her husband is also in jail, therefore, being a lady she may be given privilege of Section 437 CR.P.C., particularly when she is languishing in 2025:UHC:1593 jail since 25.12.2024. 6. On the other side, learned State Counsel submits that the investigation is going on and both the applicant and her husband are in jail, however, he has not disputed this fact that the alleged contraband recovered from the present applicant is below the commercial quantity. 7. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration the fact that the alleged contraband which was shown to be recovered from the present applicant is below the commercial quantity, and further she is a lady and her husband is also in jail in the said crime, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant- “Suman Devi” be released on bail on her executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 10. It is made clear that if the applicant found to be indulged in any such activity and will not cooperate with the investigation then the prosecution is free to move an application for bail cancellation. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 07.03.2025 Parul 2025:UHC:1593