2026:UHC:2651 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/846/2025 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Siddhartha Bankoti, learned legal aid counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned A.G.A. along with Mr. Prabhat Kandpal, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Applicant–Shahrukh Ahmad, who is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime/F.I.R. No. 463 of 2024, under Sections 8/22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Kichha, District Udham Singh Nagar, has sought his release on bail. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. As per the prosecution case, on 01.12.2024, during routine checking, the police party allegedly apprehended the applicant and recovered 11 bottles of Buprenorphine injections and 11 bottles of Avil (Pheniramine Maleate) injections from a bag carried by him. On the basis of the said alleged recovery, the present F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant on the same day. 6. Learned legal aid counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has falsely been implicated and that the mandatory provisions of the N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with. It is further contended that the safeguards envisaged under Section 50 of the Act have been violated. It is also argued that the alleged recovery is a chance recovery and no independent public witness was associated 2026:UHC:2651 at the time of the alleged search and seizure, thereby casting doubt on the prosecution version. 7. He would further submit that the applicant has no previous criminal history and is in judicial custody since 01.12.2024; that, there is material discrepancy, namely that the inventory report and the arrest memo allegedly prepared at the spot prior to the lodging of the F.I.R. contain the F.I.R. number, whereas the F.I.R. itself is stated to have been registered subsequently after a delay of about three hours. 8. Learned counsel further submits that the mention of the F.I.R. number on documents said to have been prepared before its registration creates serious doubt in the prosecution case, suggesting that such documents may have been prepared later or ante-timed. This, in turn, makes the alleged recovery doubtful. It is also submitted that the applicant is a permanent resident of District Nainital, there is no likelihood of him absconding or tampering with evidence, and the trial is likely to take a long time to conclude. 9. Per contra, learned State counsel would vehemently oppose the bail application and submitted that the recovery has been effected in accordance with law and the provisions of the N.D.P.S. Act have been duly complied with. However, on instructions, he fairly conceded that there is no corresponding G.D. entry or explanation forthcoming regarding the mention of the F.I.R. number in the documents allegedly prepared prior to registration of the F.I.R. 10. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, and upon consideration of the rival submissions and material available on record, this Court 2026:UHC:2651 finds that the discrepancy regarding the mention of the F.I.R. number in the arrest memo and inventory report documents stated to have been prepared prior to registration of the F.I.R. remains unexplained. Such an inconsistency goes to the root of the prosecution case and raises serious doubts about the fairness of the investigation and the genuineness of the alleged recovery. 11. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant has been able to make out a case for grant of bail. 12. Accordingly, the 1st bail application is allowed on the following conditions:- (a) The applicant shall execute a personal bond and furnish two reliable sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. (b) The applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the court. (c) The applicant shall appear before the investigating officer as and when required and cooperate with the investigation. (d) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence or witnesses, either directly or indirectly and shall not indulge in any criminal activity while on bail. (e) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the court or to the investigating agency, to preclude risk of absconding. 13. The bail granted to the applicant shall be liable to be cancelled in the event of any violation of the aforesaid conditions or if the applicant is found to have misused the liberty granted to him. (Alok Mahra, J.) 15.04.2026 Mamta 2026:UHC:2651