Anil vs State Of Uttarakhand on 6 April, 2026

    0
    36
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Uttarakhand High Court

    Anil vs State Of Uttarakhand on 6 April, 2026

                                                                                   COURT'S OR JUDGES'S
                  Office Notes,
                 reports, orders
                 or proceedings
    SL.
          Date    or directions
    No
                 and Registrar's
                    order with
                   Signatures
                                                                                   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.

    SPONSORED

    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

    [ad_1]

    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here