SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures UKHC010068902026 2026:UHC:5987 COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/688/2026 Manoj Kashyap --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. Mr. Mohit Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. B.C. Joshi, learned AGA for the State. 3. Present applicant-Manoj Kahsyap, S/o Late Omkar Kashyap is praying for bail in reference to First Information Report dated 02.11.2025 bearing FIR No.228 of 2025, P.S. Lalkuan, District Nainital wherein he alongwith one Dharmendra Maurya and Shadab have been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 8/22/29 read with Section 60 of the N.D.P.S. Act. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent; has been falsely implicated and also submits that the prohibited drugs, which is shown to be recovered is commercial one, therefore, Section 37 of the NDPS Act will come into the way and in reference to Section 37 of NDPS Act, he submits that firstly, the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and if he is enlarged on bail, there is no such possibility that he will repeat the same. He also submits that at the time of search and seizure though the inventory was prepared but it was not certified by the Magistrate in the manner as provided under Rule 8 of 2022 Rules because in the inventory there is only an endorsement of “seen and certified”. He further submits that the present applicant is languishing in jail since 02.11.2025 and since now the twin conditions, as stipulated under Section 37 of NDPS Act are fulfilled, therefore, the applicant be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other side, learned AGA has not disputed that the present applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and with regard to the certification of inventory, he submits that Magistrate concerned has certified the inventory by putting an endorsement of “seen and certified”, however he submits that this aspect can be looked into but it is a subject matter of trial. 6. After hearing the submission of learned counsel for the parties and in view of the discussion as above, since the twin conditions, as stipulated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act are fulfilled, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant-Manoj Kashyap 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. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 17.07.2026 Arti