Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/2383/2025 of SHAHVEJ AHMAD Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 23 July 2026
Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS UKHC010195142025 BA1/2383/2025 Shahvej Ahmad --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Saurabh
SL.
No.
Date
Office
Notes,
reports,
orders or
proceedings
or
directions
and
Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
UKHC010195142025
BA1/2383/2025
Shahvej Ahmad
--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 present applicant ‘Shahvej Ahmad’ S/o Manjood Ahmad is praying for bail in reference to First Information Report dated 30.10.2025 bearing FIR No. 518 of 2025, P.S. Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar, wherein, the present applicant is implicated for offence punishable under section 8/21 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 the alleged contraband i.e. MDMA/Methaphetamine and smack, which was shown to be recovered from the present applicant is much below the commercial quantity and even otherwise at the time of search and seizure there is no substantial compliance of mandatory provisions of NDPS Act. He also submits that the present applicant have no criminal antecedent and is languishing in jail since 31.10.2025 and in this particular case the charge- sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no need of further custodial interrogation and taking into consideration that the applicant has no previous criminal history and the alleged contraband as shown to be recovered from the present applicant is much below the commercial quantity the applicant be released on bail.
5. On the other side, learned State counsel have not disputed about the quantity of the recovered contraband, which according to him is also much below the commercial quantity and he has also not disputed that the applicant have no previous criminal history.
6. After hearing the submission of learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the quantity of the contraband, which is shown to be recovered, which is much below the commercial quantity, and the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent, this court is of the view that the applicant deserve for bail.
7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant ‘Shahvej Ahmad’ be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions: i. That the applicant shall join the trial court proceeding on each and every date without seeking any unnecessary adjournment. ii. The applicant shall surrender his passport within three days after being released on bail. iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any such activity in future and if it is found that he is indulge in such activity the prosecution is directed to immediately to move an application for cancellation of bail.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 23.07.2026 PR