I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND

AT NAI NI TAL

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

08^th JANUARY, 2026

FI RST BAI L APPLI CATI ON NO. 30 of 2026

Shivam ..…Applicant

Versus

State of Uttarakhand ..…Respondent

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Bilal Ahmed, Advocate. Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, Brief

Holder.

Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

Applicant – Shivam is in judicial custody for the

offence punishable 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.819 of 2025, registered at Kotwali Manglaur, District

Haridwar.

2. According to the First Information Report, the applicant was coming on a motorcycle on 30.12.2025. Seeing the police, he tried to escape. He tried to throw away a polythene packet kept in his jacket. He was searched. The police has recovered 9.80 gm. smack from the said polythene packet. Applicant was arrested at 14:30

hrs.

3. Heard Mr. Bilal Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, learned Brief Holder for

respondent.

4. Mr. Bilal Ahmed, Advocate, has submitted that the applicant has been implicated by the police. The alleged smack was not recovered from his possession. The said recovery is false. There was no independent witness at the time of the alleged recovery. The mandatory provision of Section 50 of the Act, 1985 was not followed. Applicant is not a convicted person. He is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding, and, the alleged recovered smack is less than commercial quantity.

5. Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, Brief Holder, has opposed the bail application orally.

6. As per the Table prepared in terms of Section 2 (xxiii-a) and Section 2 (vii-a) of the Act, 1985, 5 gm of heroin (smack) 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 – Shivam 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: 08.01.2026 Pant/