Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1931 (UTT)

ANIL v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

BA1/326/2026 · 2026-04-06

Ashish Naithani

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S 2026:UHC:2420 BA1 No. 326 of 2026 Anil ....Applicant Vs. State of Uttarakhand ......Respondent Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. Rajveer Singh, learned counsel for the Applicant through video conferencing. 2. Mr. N.S. Kaniyal, learned A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. The present Bail Application has been moved by the Applicant—Anil, aged about 33 years, S/o Hari Singh, R/o 89, Ward No. 24, Harinagar, Police Station Panipat, District Panipat, State of Haryana. The Applicant is in judicial custody in connection with FIR No. 07 of 2026, registered at Police Station Narender Nagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 8/20/60 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985. 4. Heard Mr. Rajveer Singh, learned counsel for the Applicant, and Mr. Dinesh Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State. The record has been perused. 5. Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and that there is no evidence against him to establish the commission of the alleged offence. It is further submitted that there is no independent/public witness to the alleged recovery of charas and that the mandatory provisions of the N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with. Furthermore, it is submitted that the alleged contraband recovered from the Applicant is below commercial quantity. The Applicant is in judicial custody since 03.02.2025, and no police custody remand is required in the present case. It is also submitted that the Applicant has no criminal history. 6. Learned State Counsel opposes the Bail Application, contending that the Applicant has a criminal history. 7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, and without expressing any opinion on the merits, this Court is of the view that the Applicant has made out a case for grant of bail. 8. Accordingly, the Bail Application is allowed. 9. Let the Applicant be released on bail upon executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned. 10. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (Ashish Naithani, J.) 06.04.2026 Shiksha