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
9 paragraphs · 208 wordsRavindra Maithani, J
Applicant is in judicial custody in FIR No.98 of 2024, under Sections 8/20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station ITI, Kashipur, 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 18.03.2024, narcotic substances were recovered from the possession of the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the alleged recovered quantity is less than commercial, which is evident from the bail rejection order; the applicant has no criminal history; the prosecution story is much doubtful; the applicant, being woman, is entitled to bail.
Learned State Counsel admits that the alleged recovered quantity is less than commercial. She would submit that the bail rejection order does not reveal any previous conviction of 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.