Rohit Kumar vs State Of Uttarakhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 6408 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Rohit Kumar vs State Of Uttarakhand on 18 December, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
                Bail Application No. 1 of 2025
                              In
               Criminal Appeal No.571 of 2025

Rohit Kumar                                            ......Appellant

                              Versus


State of Uttarakhand                                   ....Respondent


Present:
            Mr. Tapan Singh, Advocate for the appellant.
            Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, D.A.G. for the State.


Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.(Oral)

Instant appeal is preferred against the judgment and order

dated 27.08.2025, passed in Special Sessions Trial No. 76 of 2022,

State of Uttarakhand Vs. Rohit Kumar, by the court of Additional

District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge (NDPS Act), Vikas Nagar,

District Dehradun. By it, the appellant has been convicted and

sentenced under Section 8/22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic

Substances Act, 1985. The appellant seeks bail in this appeal.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record.

3. This is an admitted appeal.

4. List in due course.

Heard on Bail Application No. 01 of 2025

5 According to the FIR, narcotic substance was recovered

from the possession of the appellant on 20.08.2021

6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the entire

case is false. He submits that according to the prosecution, the

appellant was arrested at the spot and arrest memo was prepared at

the spot, but it bears the FIR number which was lodged much after the

alleged recovered. It casts doubt in the entire prosecution case.

7. The Court wanted to know from the learned State counsel

as to how, the arrest memo which was prepared at the spot could bear

the FIR number, which was lodged much after the alleged recovery?

8. Learned State counsel admits that there is no document to

ascertain as to how arrest memo bears the FIR number, which was

lodged much after the alleged recovery.

9. Having considered, without adverting much on merits, this

Court is of the view it is a case in which the execution of sentence

should be suspended and the appellant be enlarged on bail.

10. The bail application is allowed.

11. The execution of sentence appealed against is suspended

during the pendency of the appeal.

12. The appellant be released on bail, during the pendency of

the appeal, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two

reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the

court concerned.

13. Application for Suspension of Sentence No. 2 of 2025 also

stands disposed of accordingly.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 18.12.2025 Jitendra