I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND

AT NAI NI TAL

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

15^th OCTOBER, 2025

FI RST BAI L APPLI CATI ON NO. 1942 of 2025

Vijay Kumar ..…Applicant

Versus

State of Uttarakhand ..…Respondent

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Mohd. Safdar, Advocate.

Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Virendra Singh Rawat,

Assistant Government Advocate.

Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

The applicant Vijay Kumar is in judicial

custody for the offence under Section 8 read with Section 21 and Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, “Act, 1985”) in Case Crime No.386 of 2025, registered at

Police Station Bahadrabad, District Haridwar.

2. According to the First Information Report dated 05.10.2025, on suspicion, the applicant was apprehended by the police. The police recovered 35.31

gm. smack from his polythene. He was arrested.

3. Heard Mr. Mohd. Safdar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Virendra Singh Rawat, learned

Assistant Government Advocate for respondent.

4. Mr. Mohd. Safdar, Advocate, contended that

the applicant has been implicated by the police. The alleged recovery was planted. The said contraband was not recovered from his possession. There was no independent witness at the time of the alleged recovery. Applicant has not been convicted. He is a permanent resident of District Muzaffarnagar (Uttar Pradesh), therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding, and, the quantity of the alleged recovered smack does not fall under the category of commercial quantity.

5. Mr. Virendra Singh Rawat, Assistant Government Advocate, has opposed the bail application orally.

6. As per Table prepared in terms of Section 2 (xxiii-a) and Section 2 (vii-a) of the Act, 1985, 5 gm of heroin is small quantity and greater than 250 gm is commercial quantity (Entry No.56).

7. The object of keeping the accused in detention during the investigation is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.

8. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

9. The Bail Application is allowed.

10. Let the applicant – Vijay 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.

___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

Dt: 15.10.2025 Pant/