Laxman Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand
2026 Latest Caselaw 1984 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Laxman Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand on 16 March, 2026

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
                    Bail Application (IA No.1 of 2025)

                                    In

                  Criminal Appeal No.488 of 2025

Laxman Singh                                         ........Appellant

                                 Versus

State of Uttarakhand                               ........Respondent
Present:-

          Mr. Rahul Adhikari, Advocate for the appellant.
          Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, learned D.A.G. 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 28.05.2025, passed in Special Session Trial No.14 of 2023, State

vs. Laxman Singh by the court of learned Special Session Judge

(N.D.P.S.), Pithoragarh. By it, the appellant has been convicted under

Sections 8 read with Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of Narcotics Drugs and

Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and sentenced accordingly. The

appellant seeks bail in this appeal.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record.

3. According to the prosecution case, Charas was recovered

from the possession of the appellant on 22.12.2022.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the entire

case is false. The prosecution has not been able to prove its case.

According to the prosecution case, table under Section 52-A of NDPS

Act, arrest memo and sample seal were prepared at the spot, but it

bears the FIR number, which was lodged much after the alleged

recovery.

5. Learned State counsel admits these facts.

6. The Court wanted to know as to how FIR number could be

recorded in the arrest memo, which was prepared at the spot? There is

no answer to it.

7. Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a

case in which the execution of sentence should be suspended and the

appellant be enlarged on bail.

8. The bail application is allowed.

9. The execution of sentence appealed against is suspended

during the pendency of the appeal.

10. The appellant - Laxman Singh be released on bail, during

the 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.) 16.03.2026 16.03.2026 Akash