Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/2498/2025 on 12 March, 2026
2026:UHC:1671
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
BA1/2498/2025
Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Tajhar Qayyum, learned counsel for the applicant.
2. Mr. K.S. Bora, learned Deputy A.G. for the State.
3. The applicant-Mohd. Sadik, who is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime/F.I.R. No. 342 of 2025 registered under Sections 8/20/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act at P.S. Bhagwanpur, District Haridwar.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. As per the prosecution case, an F.I.R. was lodged by the informant on 12.10.2025 against one Shavej @ Mohd. Mia alleging that contraband was recovered from his possession.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. and his name surfaced only on the basis of the confessional statement of the co- accused. It is further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal history and is languishing in jail since his arrest.
8. Learned counsel would further submit that the applicant is a permanent resident of District Saharanpur and, 2026:UHC:1671 pursuant to the order of the Coordinate Bench of this Court, learned State counsel was directed to obtain instructions regarding the criminal history of the applicant in the State of Uttarakhand. It is also contended that the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, therefore, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
9. Per contra, learned State Counsel vehemently opposed the bail application; however, on instructions, he submitted that the applicant does not have any previous criminal history in the State of Uttarakhand.
10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, this Court finds that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. and his alleged involvement has surfaced only on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused. It is also not disputed that the applicant has no previous criminal history in the State of Uttarakhand.
11. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, and keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant has made out a fit case for grant of bail at this stage. Accordingly, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
12. The bail application is allowed.
13. Let the applicant be released on bail, on executing personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of 2026:UHC:1671 like amount, to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the following conditions:
(i) The applicant shall attend the trial Court regularly, and, he will not seek any unnecessary adjournment.
(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case.
(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without any prior permission of the trial Court.
14. It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the complainant/ informant will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.
(Alok Mahra, J.) 12.03.2026 Mamta