I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND

AT NAI NI TAL

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

10^TH JANUARY, 2026

FI RST BAI L APPLI CATI ON NO. 44 of 2026

Parvez ..…Applicant

Versus

State of Uttarakhand ..…Respondent Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Mohd. Safdar, Advocate

Counsel for the Respondent : Mrs. Rangoli Purohit, Brief

Holder.

Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

The applicant – Parvez is in judicial custody for

the offence punishable under Section 8 read with Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, “Act, 1985”) in Case Crime No.491 of 2025,

registered at Kotwali Roorkee, District Haridwar.

2. According to the First Information Report, on 29.12.2025, the police apprehended the applicant on suspicion. They recovered 9.04 gm. smack from a polythene packet held in his right hand. He was searched by

them. He was arrested at 23:55 hrs.

3. Heard Mr. Mohd. Safdar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mrs. Rangoli Purohit, learned Brief Holder for

the respondent.

4. Mr. Mohd. Safdar, Advocate, submitted that applicant is innocent. The alleged smack was not recovered

from the possession of the applicant. The alleged recovery was false. The mandatory provision of Section 50 of the Act, 1985 was not complied with. Applicant has no criminal antecedents. He is a permanent resident of District Shamli (Uttar Pradesh), therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding, and, the quantity of the alleged recovered contraband is less than commercial quantity.

5. Mrs. Rangoli Purohit, Brief Holder has opposed the bail application orally.

6. As per the Table prepared under Section 2 (xxiii- a) and Section 2 (vii-a) of the said Act, 1985, lesser than 5 gm of smack (Heroin) is small quantity and greater than

250 gm of smack 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 – Parvez 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: 10.01.2026 Pant