Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 5032 (UTT)

VIRENDRA KUMAR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

BA1/617/2025 · 2025-05-19

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:4093 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. 617 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Pankaj Joshi, learned AGA for the State. 3. Present applicant–Virendra Kumar S/o Shri Sher Singh is in judicial custody since 26.03.2025 and seeking bail in relation to FIR/Case Crime No.133 of 2025, registered on the basis of FIR dated 25.03.2025 at Police Station Kotwali Jwalapur, District Haridwar, wherein the present applicant has been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 8/21/60 of the NDPS Act, 1985. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated, and, furthermore, the alleged contraband smack, which was shown to be recovered from the present applicant, is below the commercial quantity i.e. 20.01 gram of smack. It is also submitted that and there is no proper compliance of the mandatory provision of the NDPS Act, and, furthermore, in this case, the present applicant is languishing in jail since 26.03.2025 and has no previous criminal history. 5. On the other side, learned State counsel has not disputed this fact that the alleged contraband of smack, which was shown to be recovered from the present applicant, is below the commercial quantity, and, furthermore, the applicant has no previous criminal history. 6. After hearing the arguments as 2025:UHC:4093 advanced by learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that the alleged contraband of smack, which was shown to be recovered from the present applicant, is below the commercial quantity, and, furthermore, the applicant has no previous criminal history, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the present bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant, namely, Virendra Kumar, be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 19.05.2025 R.Bisht 2025:UHC:4093