Back
2022 Supreme(UK) 434
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Ravindra Maithani, J.
Salman Pahari - Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand - Respondent
First Bail Application No. 2858 of 2022
Decided On : 23-12-2022
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Bail Applications
Act Referred
Headnote
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Bail Application - Applicant sought release on bail under Section 8/21 of the Act - Court found the case fit for bail and granted the applicant's release based on the alleged recovered quantity being less than commercial and the applicant's previous involvement in cases.
Fact of the Case:
Applicant Salman Pahari sought release on bail in a case involving the recovery of 9.30 grams of smack from his possession.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found the case fit for bail and granted the applicant's release based on the alleged recovered quantity being less than commercial and the applicant's previous involvement in cases.
Issues: Bail application under Section 8/21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the alleged recovered quantity, the applicant's claim of being falsely implicated, and his previous involvement in cases to grant bail.
Final Decision: The bail application was allowed, and the applicant was released on bail upon executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties.
Mohd. Safdar, Advocate, Lalit Miglani, Advocate
JUDGMENT
Ravindra Maithani, J. - Applicant Salman Pahari is in judicial custody in Case Crime No.572 of 2022, under Section 8/21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ('the Act'), Police Station Piran Kaliyar, 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 05.12.2022, 9.30 grams smack was allegedly recovered from the possession of the applicant.
4. It is the case of the applicant that he has been falsely implicated; there is non-compliance of the provisions of the Act; the alleged recovered quantity is less than commercial.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant was earlier involved in some cases, but he is on bail on those cases.
6. 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.
7. The bail application is allowed.
8. 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.
