Rajendra Singh Nagarkoti vs State Of Uttarakhand
2026 Latest Caselaw 2135 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Rajendra Singh Nagarkoti vs State Of Uttarakhand on 19 March, 2026

                                                                               COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
              Office Notes,
             reports, orders
             or proceedings
SL.
      Date    or directions
No
             and Registrar's
                order with
               Signatures
                                                                                      2026:UHC:1933

                               BA1 No. 403 of 2026

                               Rajendra Singh Nagarkoti       --Applicant

                                               Versus

                               State of Uttarakhand          --Respondent

                               Hon'ble Ashish Naithani, J.

Mr. J.C. Karnatak, learned counsel for the Applicant.

2. Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General assisted by Mr. Vikash Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.

3. The present Bail Application has been moved by the Applicant- Rajendra Singh Nagarkoti, aged about 28 years, S/o Late Shri Deewan Singh, R/o Fatehpur Mujhrauda, P.S. Mukhani, District Nainital. The Applicant is in judicial custody in connection with FIR/Case Crime No. 0009 of 2026, registered at Police Station Bhimtal, District Nainital, for the offences under Sections 8/20/60 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the "NDPS Act").

4. Heard Mr. J.C. Karnatak, learned counsel for the Applicant, and Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, assisted by Mr. Vikash Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for the State. Perused the record.

5. Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and is languishing in jail since 26.02.2026. It is further submitted that nothing has been recovered from the Applicant; that there is no independent witness to the alleged recovery; and that there is no incriminating evidence against the Applicant. It is further submitted that the contraband allegedly recovered is below commercial quantity.

6. Learned State Counsel opposed the Bail Application.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the Applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

8. Accordingly, the Bail Application is allowed.

9. Let the Applicant be released on bail upon executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.

10. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(Ashish Naithani, J.) 19.03.2026 Shiksha