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. 1113 of 2025 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Rajat Mittal, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Present applicant Jasbeer Singh, S/o Tilak Singh is praying for regular bail in relation to FIR dated 04.12.2024, bearing FIR/Case Crime No. 263 of 2024 registered at P.S. Rajpur, District Dehradun wherein the present applicant along with one person and another persons, namely, Premlal were implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 8/20/29/60 of the NDPS Act. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the alleged contraband which is shown to be recovered from the present applicant is commercial quantity, i.e. 1.016 kg of Charas, and therefore, Section 37 of the NDPS Act will come into the way. In reference to Section 37 of the Act, learned counsel for the applicant submits that after search and seizure no inventory was prepared , which, in fact, is the mandate of Section 52A of the NDPS Act, and, particularly, under Section 52A (4) of the Act, the inventory, so prepared, and its certification are primary evidence, and, as such, the recovery as shown is nothing but a false recovery. He further submits that non compliance of Section 52A of the Act, though, is not fatal and will not vitiate the trial but non compliance of Section 52A may be one of the factor for deciding the bail application. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that since there is no inventory, there are reasonable ground that the applicant is not guilty of the offence, as alleged by the prosecution. Apart from this, he submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history, and therefore, if he is bailed out there is less possibility that the applicant will indulge in any such activities. He further submits that since twin conditions, as stipulated under Section 37 of the Act are complied with, therefore, the applicant is entitled for bail. 6. Apart from this, he submits that charge sheet has already been filed and present applicant is languishing in jail since 05.12.2024. 7. On the other side, learned A.G.A. submits that since alleged contraband which is shown to be recovered from the applicant is commercial one, therefore, in terms of Section 37 of the Act, the applicant does not deserve for bail, however, he has not disputed this fact that at the time of search and seizure no inventory was prepared. Apart from this, he has not disputed this fact that charge sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant and furthermore the applicant has no previous criminal history. 8. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, since, there is no proper substantial compliance of Section 52A of the Act, as no inventory was prepared, therefore, non compliance of Section 52A of the Act can be looked into while deciding the bail applicant. Since, no inventory was prepared, therefore, there are reasonable grounds that the applicant is not involved in the alleged offence and furthermore, the applicant has no previous criminal history and is languishing in jail since 05.12.2024, and the charge sheet has already been filed, therefore, this Court is of the view that if the applicant is bailed out there are remote chances that the applicant will commit such activities in future. 9. In view of the submissions as well as discussion, as made above, since, twin conditions as stipulated under Section 37 of the 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 merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant “Jasbeer Singh” be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 12. It is made clear that after being released on bail if the applicant is found to be indulged in any such activities and will not cooperate with the trial, in such an eventuality, the trial court is free to proceed against the applicant for cancellation of bail. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 09.07.2025 Parul