Ashraf vs State of Uttarakhand - 2024 Supreme(UK) 153

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(UK) 153

RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Ashraf – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicant : Mr. Gaurav Singh, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, Brief Holder.

JUDGMENT :

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) :

Applicant is in judicial custody in Case Crime No.39 of 2024, under Sections 8/21/29/60 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“the Act”), Police Station Khanpur, 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 13.02.2024, 400 grams smack was recovered from the possession of the applicant.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that it is a case of non-compliance of Section 42 of the Act. Therefore, it is a case fit for bail.

5. Learned State Counsel would submit that before search, a Gazetted Police Officer was called at the place of incident, who signed the consent memo, under Section 50 of the Act. Therefore, as such, compliance of Section 42 of the Act is not required.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant, at it, would submit that the recovery memo has not been signed by the Gazetted Police Officer. Therefore, it cannot be said that the recovery was made in the presence of the Gazetted Police Officer.

7. Learned State Counsel admits that the recovery memo has not been signed by the Gazetted Police Officer. It is a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document