AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
10 paragraphs · 219 wordsRavindra Maithani, J
Since both these bail applications arise from the same FIR, they are being decided by this common order.
Applicants-Arti Devi and Arti Mistri are in judicial custody in FIR No.191 of 2022, under Sections 8/18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Pulbhata, District Udham Singh Nagar. They have sought their release on bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
According to the FIR, on 29.11.2021 both these applicants apprehended and from the possession applicant-Arti Devi, 01 Kg. Opium and from the possession of applicant-Arti Mistri, 468 grams Opium were recovered.
It is argued that the alleged recovered quantity is less than the commercial quantity. Both the applicants are women. They have no criminal history.
Learned State Counsel would submit that the bail rejection order does not reveal any previous conviction of the applicants.
Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail. Accordingly, the applicants deserve to be enlarged on bail.
The bail applications are allowed.
Let the applicants be released on bail, on their executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, for each one of them to the satisfaction of the court concerned.