I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND

AT NAI NI TAL

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

13^th OCTOBER, 2025

SECOND BAI L APPLI CATI ON NO. 230 OF 2025

Dinesh Singh Rawat ..... Applicant

Versus

State of Uttarakhand ..…Respondent

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Mohit Kumar Kashyap,

Advocate.

Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Pratiroop Pandey,

Assistant Government

Advocate.

Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

The applicant – Dinesh Singh Rawat is in judicial

custody for the offence punishable under Section 8 read with Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 in Case Crime No. 55 of 2023,

registered at Police Station Tanakpur, District Champawat.

2. The First Bail Application (BA1 No.2811 of 2023)

was dismissed as withdrawn on 21.05.2025.

3. According to the First Information Report dated 31.05.2023, on suspicion, the applicant was apprehended by the police. He was searched. The police recovered 5 kg.

charas from his possession. He was arrested.

4. Heard Mr. Mohit Kumar Kashyap, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned

Assistant Government Advocate for respondent.

5. Mr. Mohit Kumar Kashyap, Advocate, for the applicant submitted that the charge-sheet was filed on 13.10.2023. The charge was framed on 07.11.2023, but, only three witnesses have been examined by the prosecution till date.

6. Mr. Mohit Kumar Kashyap, Advocate, for the applicant further submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this matter. The alleged charas was not recovered from his possession. The alleged recovery was planted. There was no independent witness present at the time of the alleged recovery from the applicant. This fact also makes the story of the police doubtful. Applicant does not have any criminal antecedents. He is in custody since

31.05.2023.

7. Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, Assistant Government Advocate, has opposed the bail application orally. However, he conceded that only three witnesses have been examined by the prosecution till date. The first witness was examined on 08.12.2023. The second witness was examined on 01.05.2025 and the third witness was examined by the prosecution on 11.07.2025.

8. Personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is a very precious fundamental right and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.

9. In Rabi Prakash vs. The State of Odisha, 2023 0 Supreme (SC) 707, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed;

“The prolonged incarceration, generally militates against the most precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and in such a situation, the conditional liberty must override the statutory embargo created under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act.”

10. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, no reason is found to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

11. The Bail Application (BA2 No.230 of 2025) is allowed.

12. Let the applicant- Dinesh Singh Rawat 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.

___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

Date: 13.10.2025 Pant/