Shamim vs State of Uttarakhand - 2023 Supreme(UK) 59

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(UK) 59

RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Shamim – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
Arvind Vashistha, Advocate, Hemant Singh, Advocate, V.S. Rathore, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Ravindra Maithani, J. - Applicant-Shamim is in judicial custody in Case Crime No. 499 of 2020, under Sections 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Kotwali Manglore, District Haridwar. He has sought his release on bail.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. According to the FIR, on 10.08.2020 smack was recovered from one Salman and Irfan. According to the FIR, they revealed that the applicant had given money to purchase the smack and they were to deliver the smack to the applicant.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that Irfan, one of the co-accused, from whose possession, alleged recovery was made, has already been granted bail. There is no evidence against the applicant except the statement of the co-accused.

5. Learned State Counsel was given time to get instruction as to what is the material evidence against the applicant. He would submit that there is a statement of co-accused.

6. In fact, bail rejection order also reveals that the applicant and co-accused had telephonic conversation on the date of incident.

7. Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail. Acc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document