Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/2450/2025 of VAISHNO SAXENA Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 14 August 2026
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/2450/2025 Vaishno Saxena --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Saurabh Kumar
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
BA1/2450/2025
Vaishno Saxena
--Applicant
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand
--Respondent
Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant.
2. Mr. Vijay Khanduri, learned Brief Holder for the State.
3. The instant bail application is moved on behalf of ‘Vaishno Saxena’ S/o Rajkumar Saxena, for seeking regular bail in reference to First Information Report dated 20.10.2025 bearing FIR No. 0503 of 2025 P.S. Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar, wherein, he is implicated for the offence punishable under section 8/20 of NDPS Act.
4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and though the alleged contraband, which is shown to be recovered, is charas and commercial one since the quantity is 1 kg 207 gms but the search and seizure is completely doubtful as the inventory was prepared but is not certified by the Magistrate as per the procedure as laid down under the 2022 Rules and therefore, there is no substantial compliance of section 52-A of NDPS Act, and, as such, there are reasonable ground that the applicant is not the guilty of the offence as alleged.
5. Apart from this, he submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedent, therefore, if he is enlarged on bail then there is no any such possibility that he will indulge in such activity in future. He further submits that the present applicant is languishing in jail since 20.10.2025 and the charge-sheet has already been filed. He concluded his argument by submitting that since twin conditions in terms of section 37 of NDPS Act are fulfilled therefore the applicant be released on bail.
6. On the other side, learned Brief Holder have not disputed that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent and the inventory is certified by the Magistrate by putting an endorsement of seen.
7. After hearing the submission of learned counsel for the parties and in view of the discussions as above, since the twin condition as stipulated under section 37 of the NDPS Act are fulfilled, therefore, this court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail.
8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.
9. Let the applicant ‘Vaishno Saxena’ be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions: i. That the applicant after being released on bail shall join the Trial Court proceeding on each and every date without seeking any unnecessary adjournment. ii. The applicant shall not indulge in any such activity in future.
In breach of any conditions as above the prosecution is free to move bail cancellation application.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 14.08.2026 PR