2025:UHC:4297 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/721/2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Karan Anand, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Siddharath Bisht, learned Assistant Government Advocate and Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Present applicant ‘Talib’ is praying for default bail in relation to FIR dated 10.10.2024 bearing FIR No. 294 of 2024, Police Station – Sahaspur, District – Dehradun wherein present applicant has been implicated for the offence punishable under Section 8 / 20 read with Section 29/ 60 of the NDPS Act. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that present applicant was arrested on 10.10.2024 and charge-sheet has been filed on 09.04.2025, though as per Section 36 of the NDPS Act, charge-sheet has to be filed within 180 days i.e. by 08.04.2025. 5. On 01.05.2025, the State was directed to get complete details with dates and events on or after 31.03.2025, the date when the charge sheet was dispatched and disclose the date and time of e-filing of the charge sheet. 6. In response to this, supplementary affidavit was filed on 08.05.2025, wherein in paragraph 3 (i), it is contended that on 31.03.2025 the charge sheet was sent to the office of Circle Officer for approval and thereafter, on 04.04.2025, the Circle Officer approved the said charge-sheet and thereafter, on 06.04.2025 due to Sunday the said charge sheet could not be submitted before the concerned Court and thereafter, on 07.04.2025, after due perusal of the charge sheet, the Investigating Officer submitted the charge 2025:UHC:4297 sheet by hand to Chief Assistant of the court of Addl. District Judge, (NDPS Act), Vikas Nagar, Dehradun on 08.04.2025 at about 10.00 a.m. In reference to this, the Investigating Officer has also enclosed the letter sent by him to Joint Director (Law), which is enclosed as Annexure SA 1 to the affidavit. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that since the charge sheet was sent by the Investigating Officer to the office of Circle Officer for approval on 31.03.2025, no question is arise for further verification by the Investigating Officer on 07.04.2025. He further submits that statement made in para 3 of the affidavit is misleading one in order to deprive the applicant to get default bail, which is his statutory and fundamental right. 8. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Thamisharasi reported in 1995 (4) SCC 190 and give reference of para 13 and 14 of the judgement wherein it has been held that when default bail is considered, then rider of Section 37 of the NDPS Act will not come in the way. 9. Learned counsel for the applicant has further pointed out para 4 of the supplementary affidavit, which reads as under: “The Investigating Officer submitted the charge sheet on 08.04.2025 at 10.00 a.m. by hand to Chief Assistant, ADJ, NDPS Act, Vikas Nagar and thereafter on 09.04.2025 at about 05.28 pm the charge sheet was numbered.” 10. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has filed the bail application on 09.04.2025 it is very clear that charge sheet was numbered on 09.04.2025 at about 05.28 p.m. whereas the bail application was filed 09.04.2025 at 10.20 a.m. after 08.04.2025. 11. Mr. Siddharath Bisht, learned AGA for the State, submits that the charge-sheet was 2025:UHC:4297 filed within the stipulated period of 180 days i.e. on 08.04.2025. 12. This Court is not convinced with the argument of the learned AGA particularly in view of the fact that on 31.03.2025 the charge sheet was sent to the office of Circle Officer for approval, then there is no question of further verification by the Investigating Officer on 07.04.2025, and further more, charge sheet was numbered on 09.04.2025 at 05.28 i.e. after 08.04.2025. 13. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that since the charge sheet was filed after 180 days, which is evident from the statement as given in paragraph 4 since charge sheet was numbered on 09.04.2025 at 05.28 p.m., therefore, applicant is entitled for default bail, which is his statutory and fundamental right, therefore, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves for default bail. 14. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed. 15. Let the applicant ‘‘Talib” be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 22.05.2025. SKS