Uttarakhand High Court
Firoj vs State Of Uttarakhand on 13 February, 2026
Author: Alok Kumar Verma
Bench: Alok Kumar Verma
2026:UHC:894
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA
13TH FEBRUARY, 2026
FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2123 of 2025
Firoj .....Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand .....Respondent
Counsel for the Applicant : Ms. Ruhani Sahani, Advocate
through video conferencing.
Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Pankaj Joshi, Assistant
Government Advocate.
Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.
The applicant - Firoj is in judicial custody for the offence punishable under Section 8 read with Section 21 and Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 in Case Crime No.351 of 2025, registered at Kotwali Jwalapur, District Haridwar.
2. According to the First Information Report dated 12.07.2025, the co-accused Asharaf was apprehended by the police on a secret information. He was searched. The police recovered 102.33 gm. smack (heroin) from the right pocket of his kurta. He was arrested. He told the police that the recovered smack was brought by him from Firoj (applicant). 1
2026:UHC:894
3. Heard Ms. Ruhani Sahani, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pankaj Joshi, learned Assistant Government Advocate for the respondent.
4. Ms. Ruhani Sahani, Advocate, appearing for the applicant, has contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated by the co-accused Asharaf. Applicant was not involved in any alleged offence. He is not a convicted person. He is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. The co-accused Asharaf has already been granted regular bail by this Court, and, applicant is in custody since 02.09.2025.
5. Mr. Pankaj Joshi, Assistant Government Advocate, has opposed the bail application. However, he submitted that apart from the statement of the co- accused Asharaf, no other evidence has been found against the applicant.
6. The object of keeping the accused in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.
7. Having considered the submissions of learned 2 2026:UHC:894 counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.
8. The Bail Application is allowed.
9. Let the applicant - Firoj be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.
Date: 13.02.2026 Pant 3