2025:UHC:7179 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.713 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned AGA along with Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Present applicant–Mohammad Ikram S/o Abdul Mannan, is seeking bail in relation to first information report dated 02.02.2025 bearing FIR No.0032 of 2025, Police Station Banbhulpura, District Nainital, wherein the present applicant has been implicated for the offences punishable under Section 8/22 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and the alleged prohibited drugs which is shown to be recovered though is commercial one, but, in fact, there is no substantial compliance of mandatory provision of the NDPS Act. 5. He submits that since the alleged recovered prohibited drugs, is admittedly the commercial one, therefore, in such an eventuality, Section 37 will come on his way. In reference to Section 37, he submits that after search and seizure, though the inventory was prepared, but it was not properly certified by the Magistrate since only an endorsement of “seen” was put on the inventory by the Magistrate concerned, which itself reveals that there was no any separate application of the I.O. concerned, since there is no separate order by the Magistrate concerned with regard to certification of the inventory. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant also argued that the applicant is having no 2025:UHC:7179 previous criminal history and charge-sheet has already been filed on 04.07.2025. 7. On the other side, Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned AGA, have not disputed this fact that the inventory was certified by the Magistrate by putting “seen” in the inventory, however, he submits that in terms of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, since the alleged prohibited drugs which was shown to be recovered is commercial one, therefore, the applicant does not deserve for bail. Apart from this, he further submits that non- compliance of Section 52-A of the NDPS Act is not fatal and will not vitiate the trial but fairly submits that non-compliance of Section 52-A may be considered for bail. Apart from this, he admits that the applicant is having no previous criminal history and the charge-sheet has already been filed. 8. After hearing the arguments as advanced by learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that though the inventory prepared but it was certified by the Magistrate concerned by putting an endorsement of “seen”, and prima facie this Court is of the view that there is no substantial compliance of Section 52-A, and as such, there are the reasonable ground that the applicant is not involved in the alleged offence. Furthermore, the applicant have no criminal antecedents and as such, if the applicant is bailed out there is no such possibility that the applicant will misuse the bail. 9. In view of the discussion as made above since twin condition, as stipulated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, are complied with, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 10. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the present bail application is allowed. 2025:UHC:7179 11. Let the applicant, namely, Mohammad Ikram S/o Abdul Mannan, 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. 12. It is made clear that after being released on bail, the applicant shall join the proceeding of trial Court on each and every date without seeking any unnecessary adjournment. Apart from this, the trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial without being influenced with the observation as above. 13. It is also made clear that if the applicant is found to be indulged in any such criminal activity, the prosecution is given liberty to proceed for cancelling the bail. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 12.08.2025 R.Bisht 2025:UHC:7179