Narottam Singh Chauhan vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another
2026 Latest Caselaw 2213 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Narottam Singh Chauhan vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another on 20 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:1996

                               BA1 No. 415 of 2026

                               Narottam Singh Chauhan                --Applicant

                                              Versus

                               State of Uttarakhand and Another     --Respondents

                               Hon'ble Ashish Naithani, J.

Mr. Suryakand Maithani, learned counsel for the Applicant.

2. Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand.

3. The present Bail Application has been moved by the Applicant-Narottam Singh Chauhan, aged about 53 years, S/o Late Tara Singh, R/o Village Jaggi Bagwan, Post Raunlek, Police Station Guptkashi, District Rudraprayag. The Applicant is in judicial custody in connection with FIR No. 06 of 2026, registered at Police Station Guptkashi, District Rudraprayag, for the offences punishable under Sections 8/20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the "NDPS Act").

4. Heard Mr. Suryakant Maithani, learned counsel for the Applicant, and Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State. Perused the record.

5. Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter; that the alleged recovery of contraband is 532 grams of charas, which is below commercial quantity; that no independent witness was present at the time of the alleged recovery; and that there is no cogent evidence against the Applicant. It is further submitted that the Applicant has been languishing in jail since 19.02.2026.

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, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case at this stage, 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.) 20.03.2026 SB