2025:UHC:7099 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/1095/2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Ms. Radha Arya, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder the State. 3. Present applicant “Suresh Singh, son of Chetram,” is praying for regular bail in relation to First Information Report dated 08.03.2025 bearing FIR No. 0034 of 2025, Police Station – Kelakhera, District – Udham Singh Nagar, wherein present applicant has been implicated for the offences punishable under Section 8/20 read with Section 60 of the NDPS Act. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and the contraband “Charas”, which is shown to be recovered from the present applicant is above commercial quantity i.e. 1.332 kg, therefore, Section 37 of the NDPS Act will come into his way. She further submits that there is no proper substantial compliance of Section 52A of the NDPS Act and inventory was prepared but there is no proper certification by the Magistrate since, there is only an endorsement of “seen” by the concerned Magistrate, which itself reveals that, the Magistrate concerned has not applied his mind. 5. Apart from this, she submits that applicant has no previous criminal history and applicant is languishing in jail since 09.03.2025, therefore, if he be bailed out, he will not misuse the bail. 6. She finally concluded her arguments by submitting that though non compliance of Section 52A of the NDPS Act though is not 2025:UHC:7099 fatal and will not vitiate the trial but the same can be considered for deciding the bail application. 7. On the other side, Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder has vehemently oppose the bail application by submitting that since the contraband which is recovered from the present applicant is commercial one, therefore, in terms of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the applicant does deserve for bail but he fairly submit that for certification of the inventory no separate application was moved before the Magistrate and the concerned Magistrate put only an endorsement of “seen”. He further submits that though non compliance of Section 52A of the NDPS Act is not fatal and will not vitiate the trial but the same can be considered for deciding the bail applications. He also admits this fact that applicant has no previous criminal history. 8. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that there is no proper certification by the Magistrate, and as such, there are reasonable grounds that the applicant is not involved in the offence as alleged, and furthermore, since applicant has no criminal history therefore, there is no such possibility that in future, he will indulge in such activity while on bail. 9. In view of the above discussion as above, since, the twin conditions as stipulated under Section 37 of NDPS Act are now complied with and as such applicant deserves for bail. 10. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant “Suresh Singh, son of Chetram,” be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 12. It is made clear that after being released 2025:UHC:7099 on bail, applicant shall cooperate with pending investigation or will attend trial on each and every date fixed before the trial court and will not take any unnecessary adjournment. If applicant fails to comply with the aforesaid condition, the trial court is free to proceed to cancel the bail. It is made clear that the trial court may proceed with the trial without being influenced with observations as made above. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 12.08.2025. SKS