High CourtsSingle Bench

Randheer Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 1 April 2024 · Citation: (2024) 04 UK CK 0004

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ravindra Maithani, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 8, 22, 29, 37
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
First Bail Application No. 1790 Of 2022
Ask AI about this case

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 · 314 words

Ravindra Maithani, J

1.

Applicant Randheer Singh is in judicial custody FIR/Case Crime No. 236 of 2022, under Section 8/22/29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“the Act”), Police Station Sitarganj, District Udham Singh Nagar. He has sought his release on bail.

3.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant was arrested on 28.06.2022; chargesheet was submitted on 26.09.2022, but charges could be framed on 28.02.2023. It is submitted that so far, only two witnesses have been examined. PW1 was examined on 01.06.2023. PW2 was examined on 25.09.2023. Thereafter, no witness has been examined

5.

These factual aspects have not been denied by the learned State counsel.

6.

It is a case pertaining to recovery of narcotic substances in commercial quantity and in such cases, Section 37 of the Act makes specific provisions. Bail in such cases may not be granted, unless the Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. But, denial of bail does not give unfettered liberty to the prosecution to keep a person in custody without conducting a trial.

7.

The applicant is in custody for more than one year. In between, for more than six months, no progress was made in the case. The trial has yet not concluded. It commands the Court to release the applicant on bail.

8.

Having considered the entirety of facts, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

9.

The bail application is allowed.

10.

Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.