Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/995/2026 of AMAR SINGH Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 15 June 2026
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/995/2026 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Sunny Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Tumul Nainwal, learned A.G.A for
2026:UHC:4789
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
BA1/995/2026
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. Sunny Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant.
2. Mr. Tumul Nainwal, learned A.G.A for the State.
3. Present applicant Amar Singh praying for bail in reference to FIR dated 14.05.2026 bearing FIR No. 0065 of 2026, P.S. Kathgodam District Nainital wherein he has been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 8/15 read with Section 60 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 is languishing in jail since 15.05.2026 and he has no criminal history. Apart from this he submits that the alleged contraband which is shown to be recovered, i.e., doda post (poppy husk) is much below the commercial quantity and there is no substantial compliance of the mandatory provision of the NDPS Act particularly Section 50, and, furthermore, there is no independent witness. It is further submitted that the applicant was shown to be arrested on 14.05.2026 at about 16:35 hours whereas FIR was lodged later on at about 21:40 hours and there is a delay of five hours in lodging the FIR.
5. Apart from this learned counsel or the applicant submits that without any chemical analysis about the contraband, which is shown to be recovered, the prosecution draw a conclusion that the alleged contraband which was recovered is a poppy husk.
5. On the previous date, State was directed to get instructions and today on instructions Mr. Nainwal, learned A.G.A. submits that applicant has no previous criminal history.
6. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the alleged contraband which
2026:UHC:4789 is shown to be recovered is much below the commercial quantity and furthermore the applicant has no previous criminal history, 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 ‘Amar Singh’ 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.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
15.06.2026 Parul