Nitin Kumar vs State Of Uttarakhand
2026 Latest Caselaw 2359 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Nitin Kumar vs State Of Uttarakhand on 24 March, 2026

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
                     Bail Application (IA No.1 of 2023)

                                      In

                   Criminal Appeal No.271 of 2023

Nitin Kumar                                             ........Appellant

                                   Versus

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

          Mr. Parikshit Saini, Advocate for the appellant.
          Mr. V. S. Rawat, learned A.G.A. 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 25.03.2023 and 27.03.2023, passed in Special Session Trial

No.48 of 2014, State vs. Nitin Kumar by the court of 2nd Additional

Sessions Judge/Special Judge (N.D.P.S.), District Dehradun. By it, the

appellant has been convicted under Section 8/20/22 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 and narcotic

substance were recovered from the possession of the appellant on

31.10.2013.

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, the specimen seal, Exhibit 5 and 10

were prepared at the spot, but they bear 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 specimen seal and Exhibit 5 and 10, which were

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 - Nitin Kumar 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.) 24.03.2026 24.03.2026 Akash