Sanjay Singh Mahara ... vs State Of Uttarakhand
2026 Latest Caselaw 1727 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Sanjay Singh Mahara ... vs State Of Uttarakhand on 10 March, 2026

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
     Application for Bail and Suspension of Sentence (IA) No.1 of 2025
                                 In
                   Criminal Appeal No. 568 of 2025
Sanjay Singh Mahara                            ........Applicant/Appellant
                                    Vs.
State of Uttarakhand                                  ........... Respondent
Present : Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, Advocate for the applicant/appellant.
          Mr. J.S. Virk, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. Rakesh Joshi, Brief
          Holder for the State.


Coram :        Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani. J.
               Hon'ble Siddhartha Sah, J.

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

Instant appeal is preferred against the judgment and

order dated 13.08.2025, passed in Special Sessions Trial No.06 of

2023, State of Uttarakhand vs. Mr. Sanjay Singh Mahra, by the

court of Special Sessions Judge (NDPS Act)/Sessions Judge,

Champawat. By it, the appellant has been convicted under Sections

8/20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985

and sentenced accordingly. The appellant seeks bail during

pendency of the appeal.

2. Heard on Application for Bail and Suspension of

Sentence (IA) No.1 of 2025.

3. According to the FIR, on 05.09.2022, Charas was

allegedly recovered from the possession of the applicant/appellant.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that

the entire case is false. He submits that according to the

prosecution case, the sample seal and inventory report were

prepared at the spot, but they bear the FIR number, which was

lodged much thereafter.

5. This fact is not denied by the learned State Counsel.

6. The Court wanted to know from learned State Counsel

that, as to how the FIR number was recorded in the sample seal

and inventory report, when the FIR was admittedly lodged much

thereafter? He admits that the sample seal and inventory report

were prepared at the spot and they bear FIR number.

7. Having considered this and other attending factors, we

are 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.

8. The bail application is allowed.

9. The execution of sentence, which is under challenge in

this appeal shall remain suspended during the pendency of the

appeal.

10. 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.

11. List in due course.

(Siddhartha Sah, J.) (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 10.03.2026 Sanjay