SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS BA1 No. 787 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Deep Chandra Joshi, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The present applicant ‘Avnanider Kumar Singh’ is praying for regular bail in relation to First Information Report dated 26.02.2025 bearing FIR No. 83 of 2025 P.S. Kotwali Jwalapur, District Haridwar, wherein, the present applicant has been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 8/22 r/w Section 27(A) of NDPS Act. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated, which is evident from the fact that at the time of search and seizure the applicant could not produce the licence to run the medical shop. Now, in the counter affidavit the document has been enclosed and at page 41 the letter of the Drug Inspector dated 28.05.2025 is enclosed, wherein, it is clearly mentioned that the applicant is the licence holder to run the medical shop, which is valid till 02.09.2026. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the prohibited drugs as shown to be recovered from the applicant were recovered in an unauthorized manner without seeing the licence of the applicant and this is a case of malicious prosecution. 6. Apart from this, he submits that applicant have no previous criminal history. He further submits that so far as Section 37 of the NDPS Act is concerned, since the applicant is a licence holder as per the prosecution itself having the licence, which is valid upto September, 2026 and these prohibited drugs and injections were recovered as at the time of search and seizure the applicant could not produce the licence and, therefore, since the applicant is the licence holder there are reasonable grounds that the applicant has not committed offence as alleged. 7. So far as the next condition as stipulated in Section 37 of NDPS Act is concerned, since the applicant has no previous criminal history and as such if the applicant is enlarged on bail there are very remote chances that during bail he will commit the offence. 8. On the other side, learned A.G.A. oppose the bail application and submits that in view of Section 37 of the NDPS Act the applicant does not deserve for bail, however have not disputed this fact that the applicant is a licence holder to run the medical shop; however the documents relating to sale and purchase of the prohibited drugs and injections were not available at the time of search and seizure. Learned State counsel have also not disputed that applicant has no previous criminal history. 9. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, it reveals that the twin conditions as stipulated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act has been fulfilled in view of the observations as made above and, therefore, the applicant deserves for bail. 10. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case the bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant ‘Avnanider Kumar Singh’ 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.) 13.06.2025 PR