Smt. Seeta vs State Of Uttarakhand
2026 Latest Caselaw 2331 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Smt. Seeta vs State Of Uttarakhand on 24 March, 2026

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

   HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
                Bail Application No. 01 of 2025
                               In
                Criminal Appeal No.708 of 2025

Smt. Seeta                                        ......Appellant

                               Versus


State of Uttarakhand                                    ....Respondent

Present:
             Ms. Seetal Selwal, Advocate for the appellant.
             Mr. J.S. Virk, D.A.G. for the State.

                                        With

                Bail Application No. 01 of 2025
                               In
                Criminal Appeal No.705 of 2025

Manish Sajwan                                     ......Appellant

                               Versus


State of Uttarakhand                                    ....Respondent

Present:
             Mr. Karan Singh Dugtal, Advocate for the appellant.
             Mr. J.S. Virk, D.A.G. for the State.
                                         And
                Bail Application No. 01 of 2025
                               In
                Criminal Appeal No.716 of 2025

Kripal Singh                                             ......Appellant

                               Versus


State of Uttarakhand                                    ....Respondent

Present:
             Ms. Seetal Selwal, Advocate for the appellant.
             Mr. J.S. Virk, D.A.G. for the State.


Coram: Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.

Hon'ble Siddhartha Sah, J.

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

All these appeals are preferred against the common

judgment and order dated 07.11.2025, passed in Special Sessions

Trial No. 14 of 2019, State of Uttarakhand Vs. Kripal Singh, Special

Sessions Trial No. 15 of 2019, State of Uttarakhand Vs. Manish

Sajwan and Special Sessions Trial No. 16 of 2019, State of

Uttarakhand Vs. Smt. Seeta, by the court of 2nd Additional District

and Sessions Judge, Special Judge (NDPS Act, 1985), Nainital. By it,

the appellants have been convicted under Section 8/20 of the Narcotic

Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and sentenced

accordingly. They seek bail during the pendency of the appeals.

2. Criminal Appeal No. 705 of 2025 and Criminal Appeal No.

708 of 2025 are already admitted.

3. Admit the Criminal Appeal No. 716 of 2025

4. Heard on bail applications and perused the record.

5. According to the prosecution case, on 06.08.2018, ganja

was recovered from the possession of the appellants.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the

entire prosecution case is false; according to the prosecution, the

arrest memo and information memo were prepared at the spot, in the

arrest memo and information memo of the appellants Kripal Singh

and Smt. Seeta, the FIR number has been written which was lodged

much after the alleged recovery.

7. This fact is not denied by learned State counsel.

8. The Court wanted to know from the learned State

Counsel that, as to how the FIR number was recorded in the arrest

memo and information memo, when the FIR was admittedly lodged

much thereafter? He has no answer to it.

9. 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 appellants be enlarged on bail.

10. The bail applications are allowed.

11. The sentence appealed against is suspended during the

pendency of the appeal.

12. The appellants be released on bail, during the pendency

of the appeals, on their executing a personal bond and furnishing two

reliable sureties by each one of them, each of the like amount, to the

satisfaction of the court concerned.

13. List in due course.

(Siddhartha Sah, J.) (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 24.03.2026

Jitendra