Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8032 (UTT)

MAHENDRA SINGH v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

BA1/1076/2025 · 2025-06-25

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:5346 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. 1076 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Pradeep Chamyal, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned AGA for the State. 3. Present applicant–Mahendra Singh S/o Shri Karnail Singh is seeking regular bail in relation to first information report dated 10.05.2025 bearing FIR No.0095 of 2025, Police Station Nanakmatta, District Udham Singh Nagar, wherein the present applicant has been implicated for the offences punishable under Section 8/21 of the NDPS Act. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the alleged contraband- smack, which is shown to be recovered from the present applicant, is a non-commercial quantity i.e. 8.37 gram, and, furthermore, there is no proper substantial compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act and the present applicant is languishing in jail since 10.05.2025. Apart from this, it is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is having criminal history of six cases, however, in all these cases, he has been bailed out. 5. He further submits that the wife of the present applicant is 70% disable and there is one minor daughter and there is no one to look after them. 6. On the previous date, the State was directed to get instruction in the matter particularly about the family condition of the present applicant and Mr. V.S. Pal, learned AGA apprises to this Court that the applicant’s wife is 70% disable and there is one minor daughter. 7. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case that the applicant’s wife is 70% disable and there is a minor daughter, this 2025:UHC:5346 Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail but some stringent conditions should be imposed keeping in view of the past conduct of the present applicant. In such an eventuality, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the present bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant, namely, Mahendra, 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 subjected to the following conditions. (i) After being released on bail, the present applicant shall report to the concerned nearest police station in every 15 days and the concerned SHO shall record his presence. (ii) If the present applicant is found to be indulged in any criminal activity in future, the concerned Court is directed to cancel the bail forthwith. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 25.06.2025 R.Bisht 2025:UHC:5346