Uttarakhand High Court
Israr ........Appellant/ vs State Of Uttarakhand on 20 November, 2025
Author: Ravindra Maithani
Bench: Ravindra Maithani
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Bail Application (IA) No.01 of 2025
In
Criminal Appeal No. 257 of 2025
Israr ........Appellant/Applicant
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand ........... Respondent
Present : Mr. Gaurav Nagpal and Mr. Amit Tyagi, Advocates for the
appellant/applicant.
Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
Instant appeal is preferred against the judgment and
order dated 09.04.2025, passed in Special Sessions Trial No.367 of
2021, State of Uttarakhand vs. Israr, by the court of Additional
District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge (NDPS Act), Vikasnagar,
District Dehradun. By it, the appellant has been convicted and
sentenced under Sections 8/20 of the Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The appellant seeks bail during
pendency of the appeal.
2. Heard on Bail Application (IA) No.01 of 2025.
3. According to the prosecution case, on 30.10.2011,
Charas was recovered from the possession of the applicant.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that
the entire case is false; the applicant was de-boarded from the bus
and has been falsely implicated. He would submit that DW1 Manoj
Kakkar, the Driver of the bus has stated about it. He also submits
that the custody of the allegedly recovered Charas is not
established because the Malkhana register does not contain any
entry, as to when the allegedly recovered article was taken out for
examining before the Magistrate and for sending it to Forensic
Science Laboratory. He submits that there is no entry as to when
the articles were taken out from the Malkhana.
5. Learned State Counsel would submit that the
prosecution has been able to prove its case beyond reasonable
doubt, though she admits that according to PW6 Girish Negi, there
is no entry in the Malkhana register, as to when the article was
taken out from the Malkhana and when it was again kept in the
Malkhana.
6. It is the stage of bail. Much of the discussion at this
stage is to be avoided. To the extent of appreciating the controversy
the matter may be examined with the caveat that any observation
made at this stage shall have no bearing at any subsequent stage of
the case.
7. PW6 Girish Negi has stated in his statement and in
para 3 of his statement he does not state, as to when the article
was taken out for placing before the court and again when it was
deposited into the Malkhana. Learned State Counsel also admits
that, in fact, there is no entry in the Malkhana register, as to when
the article was sent to Forensic Science Laboratory.
8. Having considered this and other attending factors,
this Court is of the view that it is a case in which the execution of
sentence should be suspended and the applicant/appellant be
enlarged on bail.
9. The bail application is allowed.
10. The execution of sentence, which is under challenge in
this appeal shall remain suspended during the pendency of the
appeal.
11. Let the applicant/appellant be released on bail, during
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.
12. List in due course.
(Ravindra Maithani, J.)
20.11.2025
Sanjay
