2025:UHC:6982 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/646/2025 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Siddharth Bisht, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Present applicant– Dev Singh, S/o Narayan Singh is praying for bail in relation to FIR dated 31.01.2025, bearing FIR No. 0003 of 2025, registered at P.S. Mukteshwar District Nainital wherein the present applicant has been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 8/20 of the NDPS Act for recovery of 1.229 kg of charas. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and the alleged recovery as shown is with regard to the commercial quantity of charas, i.e., 1.229 kg but there is no substantial compliance of Section 52A of the NDPS Act. He submits that in this case counter was called and in the counter affidavit inventory is enclosed on perusal of which it appears that the inventory so prepared was not in the prescribed Form-4 under 2022 Rules. Since there is no disclosure about the details of the contraband recovered in the inventory, and not only this even the inventory was not properly certified by the Magistrate since in the inventory there is an endorsement of ‘seen’. He submits that neither the inventory was prepared in the prescribed form 4 nor it was certified by the Magistrate concerned with due application of mind which itself reveals that there is no compliance of Section 52A of the NDPS Act. He further submits that though non compliance of Section 52A of the NDPS Act is not fatal and will not vitiate the trial but 2025:UHC:6982 this aspect can be looked into for considering bail. He submits that since there is no disclosure about the recovered item in the inventory report and further there is no proper certification by the Magistrate concerned, therefore, there are reasonable grounds that the applicant is not involved in the said crime. Apart from this, he submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and is languishing in jail since 10.02.2025. 5. On the other side, Mr. Siddharth Bisht, learned A.G.A. for the State have not disputed this fact that the there is no disclosure about the contraband which was recovered from the applicant in the inventory and furthermore in the inventory there is an endorsement of ‘seen’ by the Magistrate but there is no separate order of certification of the inventory. He has also not disputed this fact that the applicant has no criminal history. He further submits that the applicant does not deserve for bail in terms of Section 37 of the NDPS Act since the alleged contraband which is shown to be recovered is commercial one, and non compliance of Section 52A of the NDPS Act is fatal and will not vitiate the trial. 6. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the inventory so prepared is not in the prescribed Form-4 under 2022 Rules and there is no proper certification by the Magistrate concerned and this aspect can be looked into while considering the bail. Therefore, since, there is no substantial compliance of Section 52A of the NDPS Act, therefore, this Court is of the view that there are reasonable grounds that the applicant is not involved in the said offence. Apart from this, admittedly the applicant has no previous criminal history, therefore, if the applicant is enlarged on bail then there is no such possibility that he will misuse the bail. In view of the 2025:UHC:6982 discussions as above, since twin conditions, as stipulated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, are complied with, therefore, this court is of the view that the the applicant deserves for bail. 8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant, namely, Dev Singh 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.) 08.08.2025 Parul 2025:UHC:6982