2026:UHC:2334 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Bail Application 1^st No. 195 of 2026 Mohd. Ubesh ......Applicant Vs.

State of Uttarakhand …..Respondent With Bail Application 1^st No. 198 of 2026 Kasim Ali ......Applicant Vs.

State of Uttarakhand …..Respondent Presence:

Mr. Deepak Joshi, learned counsel for the Applicants in BA1 195 of 2026 and BA1 of 198 of 2026.

Mr. Girish Chandra Joshi, Learned A.G.A. for the State.

Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J.

1. The present bail applications, preferred by the Applicants, namely Mohd. Ubesh and Kasim Ali, arise out of the same Case Crime No. 0420 of 2025, under Sections 8/22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Bajpur, District Udham Singh Nagar, and involve identical allegations, common questions of fact and law, therefore, they are being decided together by this common order.

2. The Applicants, Mohd. Ubesh and Kasim Ali, are in judicial custody in connection with the aforesaid case, which has been registered on the basis of a recovery effected by the Drug Inspector in association with the local police.

3. The State’s case, in brief, is that on 05.12.2025, Senior Drug Inspector Neeraj Kumar, along with the police party, allegedly recovered from the possession of the Applicants, Mohd. Ubesh and Kasim Ali, 11,056 capsules of Spas Proxymin Plus, 2,640 capsules of Proximo Spas Capsules, 10,200 capsules of Patmol- Spas Capsules, and 2,400 tablets of Alprazolam Tablets I.P. 0.50 mg, at Adarsh Nagar, Ward No. 07, near Chuna Bhatti, Sultanpur Patti, within Police Station Bajpur, District Udham Singh Nagar. The said capsule formulations are described in the record as containing Paracetamol/Acetaminophen, Dicyclomine Hydrochloride and Tramadol Hydrochloride, while the tablets are described as Alprazolam 0.50 mg. The State case is that the recovered contraband falls within the category of commercial quantity.

4. It is further the case of the State that upon inquiry made at the spot, the accused persons, namely Mohd. Ubesh and Kasim Ali, disclosed that additional quantities of such substances were kept at a residential premises.

5. The FIR came to be registered on 06.12.2025 under Sections

8/22 of the NDPS Act at Police Station Bajpur, District Udham Singh Nagar. The Applicants were thereafter taken into custody and have remained in judicial custody since then.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

7. Learned counsel Shri Deepak Joshi, appearing for the Applicant Mohd. Ubesh, submits that the Applicant has been falsely implicated and no recovery has been effected from his conscious possession. It is contended that the alleged contraband was recovered from a place which was open and accessible, and therefore the essential ingredient of possession is not made out.

8. It is further submitted that the medical store from where part of the recovery is alleged is duly licensed and stands in the name of a family member, and the Applicant has no role in its operation. Learned counsel also submits that there has been non- compliance of mandatory provisions of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act and that no independent witnesses have been associated with the recovery.It is lastly submitted that the Applicant has no criminal antecedents and is not likely to misuse the liberty of bail.

9. Learned counsel on behalf of Applicant Kasim Ali adopts the submissions advanced on behalf of the co-accused Mohd. Ubesh and, in addition thereto, submits that the role attributed to the present Applicant is even more remote and indirect.

10. It is contended that the alleged recovery cannot be said to be from the conscious possession of the Applicant Kasim Ali, and the prosecution has failed to establish any direct nexus between the Applicant and the contraband substances. Learned counsel submits that mere presence at or near the place of recovery is insufficient to attract the rigours of the NDPS Act in the absence of cogent material establishing possession.

11. Learned