2025:UHC:6064 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. 701 of 2025 BA1 No. 1002 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Kaparuwan, learned counsel for the applicants. 2. Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. These two separate bail applications have been moved by ‘Praveen Singh Rawat’ S/o Ram Singh and ‘Ritik Negi’ S/o Roshan Singh Negi, who are praying for bail in relation to First Information Report dated 19.03.2025 bearing FIR No. 01 of 2025 P.S. Revenue Circle Jhimar, District Almora, wherein, both the applicants have been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 8/20 r/w Section 60 of NDPS Act. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that both the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated and the alleged contraband as shown to be recovered from joint possession, is commercial one i.e. 24.196 kg ganja, therefore, Section 37 of NDPS Act will come into their way. 5. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicants that there is no proper substantial compliance of Section 52A of NDPS Act since the inventory which was prepared after search and seizure was not prepared in the prescribed Form-4 of NDPS Rules, 2022 and furthermore there is no proper compliance of Section 42 of the NDPS Act since the vehicle from which the recovery is shown is on the basis of the information of an informer, which was not recorded in writing. He further submits that there is no chemical analysis report in order to make full compliance of Section 52A of NDPS Act. He submits that since the mandatory provisions has not been complied with, therefore, there are sufficient material which reveals that the applicants are not involved in the said offence. 6. Apart from this, he submits that both the 2025:UHC:6064 applicants have no previous criminal history and if both the applicants are bailed out then there is less possibility that after being released on bail they will involve in similar activity. He further submits that both the applicants are languishing in jail since 19.03.2025 and the applicant-Praveen Rawat was the driver of the vehicle and other applicant Ritik Negi was the attendant and two persons ran away from the spot. 7. On the other side, Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned A.G.A. submits that inventory so prepared after search and seizure was properly certified by Magistrate and, therefore, it is wrong to say that Section 52A has not been complied with. He further submits that there is no need of compliance of Section 42 of NDPS Act since the vehicle in question was commercial, however, he admits this fact that the search was done on the information of informer. 8. Apart from this, he has not disputed this fact that both the applicants have no previous criminal history. 9. After hearing the arguments of both the parties and further taking into consideration with regard to non compliance of Section 52A of NDPS Act after perusing the inventory so prepared after the search and seizure prima-facie it appears that the inventory so prepared is not strictly as per the prescribed Form-4 as prescribed under Rules 2022, therefore, there are reasonable grounds that the applicants are not involved in the alleged offence. So far as other aspects are concerned both the applicants have no previous criminal history and if they are enlarged on bail then there is less possibility that they will indulge in such criminal activities in future. Thus, the twin conditions as stipulated under Section 37 of NDPS Act are now fulfilled and as such both the applicants deserve for bail. 10. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case the bail applications are allowed. 11. Let the applicants ‘Praveen Singh Rawat’ and ‘Ritik Negi’ be released on bail on furnishing their personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court 2025:UHC:6064 concerned. 12. It is made clear that after being released on bail if both the applicants are found to be indulged in any such criminal activities in future the concerned court is free to take appropriate action against both the applicants including cancellation of bail. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 14.07.2025 PR