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
12 paragraphs · 234 wordsRavindra Maithani, J
Applicant is in judicial custody in FIR No. 27 of 2024, under Sections 8/20/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Raipur, District Dehradun. She has sought her release on bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
According to the prosecution case, on 20.01.2024, charas in commercial quantity was recovered from the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the entire case is false; in the arrest memo which was allegedly prepared at the spot, FIR number is recorded, which doubts the prosecution case.
The Court posed a question as to how the arrest memo bears the FIR number, which was lodged much after the alleged recovery?
Learned State counsel would submit that as per instructions, the FIR number in the arrest memo was lodged subsequently.
The Court posed further question, as to whether there is any document?
Learned State counsel fairly concedes there is no document to this effect.
Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant be released on bail, on her executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.