Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/822/2026 of JITENDRA SINGH RATHOUR Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 17 July 2026
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/822/2026 Jitendra Singh Rathour --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Girish
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
BA1/822/2026
Jitendra Singh Rathour
--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. Girish Chandra Lakhchaura, learned counsel for the applicant.
2. Mr. B.C. Joshi, learned A.G.A. for the State.
3. Present applicant Jitendra Singh Rathour, S/o Prabindra Singh Rathour is praying for bail in reference to FIR dated 04.05.2026 bearing FIR No. 0144 of 2026, P.S. Haldwani District Nainital wherein he has been implicated for the offences punishable under Section 8/20 of the 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 “Charas” which is shown to be recovered is below the commercial quantity and with regard to search and seizure there is no substantial compliance of the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act and the present applicant have no criminal antecedent and is languishing in jail since 05.05.2026.
5. On the other side, learned counsel for the State have not disputed that the alleged contraband “charas” which is shown to be recovered is below the commercial quantity and the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent, however, investigation is going on.
6. After hearing the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the alleged contraband which is shown to be recovered is below the commercial quantity and the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail.
7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant “Jitendra Singh Rathour” be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following condition:-
(i) After being released on bail the applicant shall cooperate with the ongoing investigation and will not indulge in any such activity in future.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
17-07-2026
Parul