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 · 236 wordsRavindra Maithani, J
Delay in filing counter affidavit is condoned. Counter affidavit is taken on record. Delay Condonation Application IA No.1 of 2024 stands disposed of, accordingly.
Applicant Smt. Leelawati @ Neelam is in judicial custody in Case Crime No.10 of 2024, under Sections 8 and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“the Act”), Police Station- Jaspur, District- Udham Singh Nagar. She has sought her release on bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
According to the FIR, on 05.01.2024, narcotic substances, in less than commercial quantity, were recovered from the possession of the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the recovery is false; there is no independent witness; the alleged proceeding is in defiance of the provisions of the Act; the alleged recovered quantity is less than commercial; applicant is not a previous convict.
Learned State Counsel admits that the applicant is not a previous convict, although there are some cases pending against the applicant.
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.
