Azmat vs State Of Uttarakhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 2695 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Azmat vs State Of Uttarakhand on 20 May, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
               Bail Application No. 02 of 2024
                              In
               Criminal Appeal No.227 of 2024

Azmat                                                ......Appellant

                              Versus


State of Uttarakhand                                ....Respondent

Present:
            Mr. M.A. Khan and Ms. Sheetal Selwal, Advocates for the
            appellant.
            Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, D.A.G. for the State.


Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.(Oral)

The appellant proposes to challenge judgment and order

dated 27.09.2023, passed in Special Sessions Trial No. 65 of 2014,

State of Uttarakhand Vs. Azmat, by the court of Special Judge

(N.D.P.S. Act), Udham Singh Nagar. By it, the appellant has been

convicted under Section 8/20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic

Substances Act, 1985 and sentenced thereunder. The appellant has

sought bail in this appeal.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record.

3. It is an admitted appeal.

Heard on Bail Application No. 2 of 2024

4. According to the prosecution case, on 18.01.2024, 255

gram charas was allegedly recovered from the possession of the

appellant.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the

appellant is in jail for more than 22 months. In the instant case, the

custody of seized article has not been proved. As the whether, the

same recovered article was placed for forensic examination. He would

submit that once the article was returned by the FSL, it was again

sent, but where was the custody during this period is not established

by the prosecution.

6. Learned State counsel would submit that the prosecution

has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.

7. 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.

8. The bail application is allowed.

9. The sentence appealed against is suspended during the

pendency of the appeal.

10. 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.

11. List in due course.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 20.05.2025 Jitendra