Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/2479/2025 of JITENDRA TOMAR ALIAS JEETU Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 9 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 BA1/2479/2025 Jitendra Tomar Alias Jeetu --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Bhupesh
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
BA1/2479/2025
Jitendra Tomar Alias Jeetu
--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. Bhupesh Kandpal and Mr. Kunal Verma, learned counsel for the applicant.
2. Mr. Vijay Khanduri, learned Brief Holder for the State.
3. The present applicant “Jitendra Tomar @ Jeetu, son of Kripal Singh,”, is praying for regular bail in reference to FIR dated 11.09.2025 bearing FIR No. 152 of 2025 registered at Police Station – Raiwala, District – Dehradun wherein one Mohit has been implicated for the offence punishable under Section 8, 21 and 60 of the NDPS Act.
4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated only because of the reason that he was involved in similar nature of offences earlier also, though he is already bailed out and in the present case, though there is no recovery from the present applicant however, he is made accused for the offence punishable under Section 27A and 29 of the NDPS Act and recovery which is shown from the possession of Mohit is 8.22 gram of smack, which is much below commercial quantity and other co-accused Mohit has already been enlarged on bail by the trial court and applicant is languishing in jail since 27.10.2025 and charge sheet has already been filed.
5. On the other side, learned State Counsel has not disputed that applicant is enlarged on bail in earlier two cases and there is no recovery from the present applicant and applicant is languishing in jail since 27.10.2025 and charge sheet has already been filed, however, there is some money transaction in the account of wife of present applicant, who is no more.
6. After hearing the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the contraband which is recovered from other co-accused Mohit is much below the commercial quantity and applicant has already been enlarged on bail in earlier two cases and is languishing in jail since 27.10.2025, 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 Tomar @ Jeetu, son of Kripal Singh,” 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 condition: i. The applicant after being released on bail shall join the trial court proceeding on each and every date without seeking any unnecessary adjournment. ii. If the applicant is found to be indulged in future in similar nature of offence, the prosecution is free to move bail cancellation application.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 09.07.2026 SKS