Uttarakhand High Court
Mohd. Raza vs State Of Uttarakhand on 12 March, 2026
Author: Ravindra Maithani
Bench: Ravindra Maithani
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Second Bail Application No.212 of 2025
Mohd. Raza ........Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ........Respondent
Present:-
Mr. R.C. Tamta, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. V.S. Rawat, A.G.A. for the State.
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
Applicant is in judicial custody in FIR No. 124 of 2024,
under Sections 8/22/60 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, 1985 (“the Act”), Police Station Kelakhera, District
Udham Singh Nagar. He has sought his release on bail.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record.
3. This is second bail application of the applicant. His first
bail application was rejected on merits on 02.04.2025.
4. According to the FIR, on 23.09.2024, narcotic substance in
commercial quantity was allegedly recovered from the applicant.
5. It is argued that charge sheet in the matter was filed on
19.12.2024; cognizance was taken on 28.03.2025; charge was framed
on 03.05.2025; thereafter, not even a single witness has been
examined.
6. It is a case of recovery of narcotic substance in commercial
quantity and in such cases Section 37 of the Act makes specific
provisions. Bail in such cases may not be granted, unless the Court is
2
satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the
accused is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit
any offence while on bail. But, denial of bail does not give unfettered
liberty to the prosecution to keep a person in custody without
conducting a trial.
7. The applicant is in custody for more than a year. For more
than six months in between not even a single witness was examined.
8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case,
this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant
deserves to be enlarged on bail.
9. The bail application is allowed.
10. Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing a
personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like
amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
(Ravindra Maithani, J)
12.03.2026
Jitendra
[ad_1]
Source link
