SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S 2026:UHC:4314 BA1 No. 901 of 2026 Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. Prateek Tripathi, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the Applicant. 2. Mr. Vikash Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 4. The present Bail Application has been moved by the Applicant, namely Jitendra Kumar, S/o Subash Chandra, R/o Diggi Thaska, Thana Nanauta, District Saharanpur, who is in judicial custody in connection with Special Sessions Trial No. 29 of 2026 arising out of FIR No. 28 of 2025, registered at Police Station Mori, District Uttarkashi, for offences punishable under Sections 8/20/60 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 5. Learned counsel for the Applicant, while pressing the present bail application, submitted that the Applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and is in judicial custody since 13.10.2025. It is contended that there is no independent witness to the alleged recovery and that the mandatory provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 were not complied with during the alleged search and seizure. Learned counsel further submitted that the co-accused, namely Shahnwaj Alam, has already been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.03.2026 and that the case of the present Applicant stands on parity with that of the said co-accused. 6. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposed the bail application. However, he could not dispute the fact that the co- accused has already been enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.03.2026. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court finds that the co- accused has already been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The Applicant, therefore, appears to be entitled to the benefit of parity. 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, namely Jitendra Kumar, 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. (Ashish Naithani, J.) 30.05.2026 Shiksha