BA1/2569/2024
2025 Latest Caselaw 5805 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

BA1/2569/2024 on 27 November, 2025

              Office Notes,
             reports, orders
             or proceedings
SL.
      Date    or directions               COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
             and Registrar's
               order with
               Signatures
                               BA1 No.986 of 2025
                               with
                               BA1 No.2569 of 2024
                               Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.

Mr. Vikas Anand and Mr. Karan Singh Dugtal, Advocates for the applicants.

Mr. Pradeep Lohani, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.

2. These first bail applications have been moved by the applicants seeking regular bail in F.I.R./Case Crime No.0213 of 2024, under Section 8/22/60 of N.D.P.S. Act, registered at Police Station Kichha, District Udham Singh Nagar.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants have falsely implicated in the instant crime and are languishing in jail since 22.11.2024 and 08.05.2024 respectively. It is contended that the Inventory Report has not been certified by the Magistrate in accordance with Form-4 as prescribed under Rule 8 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Seizure, Storage, Sampling and Disposal) Rules, 2022. It is further submitted that a bare perusal of the F.I.R. demonstrates that the inventory is shown to have been prepared at the spot, yet it strangely contains the F.I.R. number, which raises serious doubt regarding its genuineness. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narcotics Control Bureau Vs. Kashif, reported in (2024) 11 SCC 372, wherein it has been held that procedural irregularities and non-compliance with mandatory provisions under the N.D.P.S. Act are material considerations while adjudicating bail applications. It was further held that although Section 37 of the Act prescribes stringent twin conditions for the grant of bail, the Court is nonetheless required to examine whether serious procedural lapses exist which may undermine the credibility of the prosecution case.

4. On last occasion, State Counsel was granted time to get instructions as to whether there is entry of the F.I.R. in the G.D. Today, on instructions, learned State Counsel submits that there is no such entry in the G.D.

5. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion as to the final merits of the case, this Court is of the view that applicants deserve bail at this stage.

6. The bail applications are allowed.

7. Let the applicants, namely, Krishna@Kinna@Prince and Rafi Ahmed be released on bail, on executing personal bond by each one of them and furnishing two reliable sureties by each one of them, each of like amount, to the satisfaction of Court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The applicants shall attend the trial Court regularly, and, they will not seek any unnecessary adjournment.

(ii) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case.

(iii) The applicants shall not leave India without any prior permission of the trial Court.

It is clarified that if the applicants misuse or violate any of the conditions, imposed upon them, the complainant/ informant will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.

(Alok Mahra, J.) 27.11.2025 Arpan

ARPAN

DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,

2.5.4.20=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c04853654 45e3a20dddb7393398f9fe45ba3e,

JAISWAL postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68D9D454 C5109CB987446351E4DF04AADAA2C2CEA66, cn=ARPAN JAISWAL Date: 2025.11.27 18:13:27 +05'30'