[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
Dheeraj vs State Of Uttarakhand on 17 February, 2026
Author: Alok Kumar Verma
Bench: Alok Kumar Verma
2026:UHC:1010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA
17th FEBRUARY, 2026
FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO.58 of 2026
Dheeraj .....Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand .....Respondent
Counsel for the Applicant : Ms. Aishwarya Thapliyal,
Advocate holding brief of Mr.
Abhishek Verma, Advocate.
Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, Assistant
Government Advocate.
Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.
Applicant-Dheeraj is in judicial custody for
the offence under Section 8 read with Section 20 of the
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
(in short, "Act, 1985") in Case Crime No.489 of 2025,
registered at Police Station Kashipur, District Udham
Singh Nagar.
2. As per the First Information Report dated
05.12.2025, on 04.12.2025, Jeevan Kumar, Kunal
Pandey and the present applicant were going on a
motorcycle. The co-accused Jeevan Kumar was driving
the said motorcycle. Seeing the police, the co-accused
tried to turn the motorcycle. They were apprehended
by the police. The police recovered 6.200 kg. ganja
2026:UHC:1010
from the possession of the co-accused Jeevan Kumar.
The police recovered 5.590 kg. ganja from the
possession of the co-accused Kunal Pandey, and, they
recovered 5.990 kg. ganja from the possession of the
present applicant. They were arrested at 00:25 hrs.
3. Heard Ms. Aishwarya Thapliyal, learned
counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey,
learned Assistant Government Advocate for the
respondent.
4. Ms. Aishwarya Thapliyal, Advocate,
contended that the applicant has been falsely
implicated by the police. The alleged recovery was
planted. There was no independent witness at the time
of the alleged recovery. Applicant is not a convicted
person. He is a permanent resident of District Udham
Singh Nagar, therefore, there is no possibility of his
absconding. The co-accused Jeevan Kumar and Kunal
Pandey have already been granted regular bail by this
Court, and, the quantity of the alleged recovered ganja
is less than commercial quantity.
5. Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, Assistant Government
Advocate has opposed the bail application orally.
6. As per the Table prepared in terms of Section
2(xxiii-a) and Section 2 (vii-a) of the Act, 1985, 1000
2026:UHC:1010
grams of Ganja is small quantity and greater than 20
Kg. is the commercial quantity (Entry No.55).
7. The object of keeping the accused in
detention during the investigation is not punishment.
The main purpose is manifestly to secure the
attendance of the accused.
8. Having considered the submissions of learned
counsel for both the parties and in the facts and
circumstances of the case, without expressing any
opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the
view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.
9. The Bail Application is allowed.
10. Let the applicant - Dheeraj be released on
bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing
two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the
satisfaction of the court concerned.
___________________
ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.
Date:17.02.2026
Shiv/
