BA1/2203/2025
2026 Latest Caselaw 1597 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

BA1/2203/2025 on 27 February, 2026

               Office Notes,
            reports, orders or
             proceedings or
No   Date                                   COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
              directions and
            Registrar's order
             with Signatures

                                 BA1 No. 2203 of 2025
                                 Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.

Ms. Shumayla Zafri and Ms. Lubhna Jahan, learned counsels for the applicant.

2. Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned A.G.A. for the State.

3. The applicant - Saurav Saraswat, who is in judicial custody in connection with FIR/Case Crime No. 0439 of 2025, under Sections 8/22 of NDPS Act, registered at P.S.- Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, has sought his release on bail.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

5. In the present case, an FIR was lodged on 07.10.2025 under Sections Sections 8/22 of NDPS Act, whereby, the contraband weighing 248 grams in total was alleged to be recovered from the possession of the applicant.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has falsely been implicated in this case; that the applicant was arrested on 07.10.2025 and as per the FIR, 480 capsules of spasprox, 50 tablets of Alprazolam, etc. were recovered from the shop of the applicant. Total weight of the capsules so alleged to be recovered was 248 grams. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the inventory report is dated 06.10.2025 i.e. one day prior to his arrest and arrest memo were allegedly prepared at the spot prior to the lodging of the F.I.R.; however, all such documents bear the F.I.R. number. Learned counsel submits that, on this basis, recovery appears to be planted and this circumstance creates a serious doubt about the genuineness of the prosecution version. If the documents were prepared before registration of the F.I.R., the mention of the F.I.R. number on such documents indicates ante-timing and manipulation.

7. Learned State Counsel, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the bail application.

8. It is further contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is in custody since 07.10.2025 and even otherwise also, the alleged contraband recovered from the possession of the applicant is below commercial quantity.

9. Having considered the submissions, under the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that alleged contraband recovered from the possession of the applicant is below commercial quantity and that the inventory was prepared one day prior to the arrest of the applicant, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

10. The bail application is allowed.

11. Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of like amount, to the satisfaction of Court concerned.

(Alok Mahra J.) 27.02.2026 Ujjwal