Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/1032/2026 of MUNTIYAZ 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 BA1/1032/2026 Muntiyaz --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Mohd. Safdar,
UKHC010101462026
2026:UHC:6011
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
BA1/1032/2026
Muntiyaz
--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. Mohd. Safdar, learned counsel for the applicant.
2. Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State.
3. The present applicant ‘Muntiyaz’ S/o Mohd. Tahir is praying for bail in reference to First Information Report dated 02.06.2026 bearing FIR No. 118 of 2026 P.S. Piran Kaliyar, District Haridwar, wherein, the present applicant 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 the alleged contraband, which is shown to be recovered is much below the commercial quantity i.e. 2 kg 416 gms and the applicant has no previous criminal history and is languishing in jail since 02.06.2026. He also submits that there is no substantial compliance of mandatory provisions of NDPS Act while making search and seizure of the contraband.
5. On the other side, Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned A.G.A. have not disputed that the present applicant has no previous criminal history and have also not disputed about the quantity of the contraband, which is shown to be recovered from the applicant, which is much below the commercial quantity.
6. After hearing the submission of learned counsel for the parties and taking into
UKHC010101462026
2026:UHC:6011 consideration that the applicant has no previous criminal history and the contraband, which is shown to be recovered is much below the commercial quantity, 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 ‘Muntiyaz’ 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. After being released on bail, the applicant shall not indulge in any such activity in future. ii. The applicant shall cooperate with the ongoing investigation, if any, and if the charge-sheet is filed will join the Trial Court proceeding on each and every date without seeking any unnecessary adjournment.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 17.07.2026 PR