SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S 2026:UHC:3770 BA1 No. 596 of 2026 Wasim alias Chota ....Applicant Vs. State of Uttarakhand ......Respondent Hon ’ble Ash ish Nait han i, J. Ms. Sadaf, learned counsel for the Applicant. 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—Wasim alias Chota, S/o Husain Ahmad, R/o Ward No. 3, Mohalla Bahrikila Kasba Landhora, P.S. Kotwali Manglaur, District Haridwar. The Applicant is in judicial custody in connection with FIR No. 0716 of 2025, registered at Police Station Manglaur, District Haridwar, for offences punishable under Section 8 read with Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that the Applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and is languishing in jail since 28.10.2025. It is also submitted that the alleged recovery is wholly fabricated and that no independent witness was associated at the time of the alleged search and seizure. It is further submitted that the mandatory provisions of the N.D.P.S. Act have not been complied with and there exists serious doubt regarding the manner of search, seizure and sampling. Learned counsel further contended that the alleged recovery of contraband is planted and that only 06.35 grams of smack, which is non- commercial quantity, is alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the Applicant. 6. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposed the bail application. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court finds that the alleged recovery shown from the possession of the Applicant is of non- commercial quantity. This Court further finds that no independent witness was associated during the alleged search and seizure proceedings and there appears to be a discrepancy regarding the mention of the FIR number while preparing the inventory report. The submissions regarding non-compliance of the mandatory provisions of the N.D.P.S. Act and the manner of search, seizure and sampling also require consideration. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the Applicant has been able to make out a fit case for grant of bail. 8. Accordingly, the Bail Application is allowed. 9. Let the Applicant—Wasim alias Chota be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 10. It is made clear that any observation made hereinabove is only for the purpose of adjudication of the present bail application and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. 11. All pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. ( Ash ish Nait h an i, J.) 15.05.2026 Shiksha