Uttarakhand High Court
Jitendra vs State Of Uttarakhand on 15 April, 2026
Office Notes,
reports, orders COURT'S OR JUDGES'S
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions
No
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
Bail Application (IA No. 03 of 2025)
In
CRLA No. 714 of 2025
Jitendra ....Appellant
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand ......Respondent
Hon'ble Ashish Naithani, J.
Ms. Reema Rana, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the
Appellant.
2. Mr. Rakesh Kumar Joshi, learned A.G.A. for the State of
Uttarakhand.
3. The present Criminal Appeal is against the judgment and
order dated 01.03.2025, passed by the learned Special Sessions
Judge (NDPS Act)/District and Sessions Judge, Champawat in
Special Sessions Trial No. 35 of 2020, whereby the Appellant has
been convicted under Sections 8/20 of the NDPS Act, 1985 and
sentenced to undergo nine years of rigorous imprisonment along
with a fine of Rs. 50,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, to
further undergo one year of simple imprisonment.
4. Today, the matter is listed for disposal of the bail application
moved on behalf of the Appellant.
5. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that, for the
purpose of consideration of bail, there were two accused persons
allegedly involved in the possession of contraband (charas). One
co-accused, namely Satyanarayan, from whose possession 450
grams of charas was recovered, and the present Appellant–
Jitendra, from whose possession 1 kg of charas is alleged to have
been recovered. It is further submitted that there are material
discrepancies in the prosecution case. Firstly, the mandatory
provisions of Section 42 of the NDPS Act, 1985 have not been
complied with. Secondly, there are discrepancies regarding the
weight of the contraband, as the person who allegedly weighed the
contraband has not been examined as a witness, making it uncertain
as to the exact quantity recovered. Besides this, no independent
witness has been produced in the present matter.
6. Learned State Counsel, however, refutes the said submissions
and submits that although it is stated that the present Appellant has
no criminal history, the impugned judgment records that the
Appellant-Jitendra was summoned from District Jail Bilaspur,
Himachal Pradesh. Therefore, his criminal antecedents are required
to be verified, and the same needs to be called for.
7. List this case on 23.04.2026.
(Ashish Naithani, J.)
15.04.2026
SB
