High CourtsSingle Bench

Vikas Kumar vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 22 August 2023 · Citation: (2023) 08 UK CK 0111

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 2(viia), 2(xxiiia), 8, 20, 60
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
First Bail Application No. 1855 Of 2023
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 · 334 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

Present Application has been filed for grant of regular bail in connection with the Case Crime No.416 of 2023, registered at police station S.I.D.C.U.L., District Haridwar under Section 8/20/60 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, “Act, 1985”).

2.

As per FIR, informant Ajay Krishna, Sub-Inspector, was busy in checking the vehicles along with other police personnel. They saw two persons coming on a motorcycle. On suspicion, they were apprehended. Police party recovered 6 kg. 700 grams of Ganja from their possession. Present applicant and the co-accused were arrested on 31.07.2023 at 20:45 hrs.

3.

Heard Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Mrs. Manisha Rana Singh, learned AGA for the State.

4.

Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate, contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. Nothing was recovered from his possession. The alleged recovery was planted. Applicant has no criminal history, and, the alleged recovered contraband is non-commercial.

5.

On the other hand, Mrs. Manisha Rana Singh, learned AGA for the State, has opposed the bail application. However, she has conceded that the applicant has no criminal history

6.

As per Table prepared under Section 2 (xxiii-a) and Section 2 (vii-a) of the said Act, 1985, lesser than 1000 grams of Ganja is small quantity and greater than 20 kg. of Ganja is commercial quantity (Entry No.55).

7.

Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merit of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

8.

The Bail Application is allowed.

9.

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