Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/158/2026 of SUMIT THAPLIYAL Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 4 February 2026
UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL First Bail Application No.158 of 2026 Sumit Thapliyal …..….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. Reituparna Joshi, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Rakesh Negi, Brief Holder for the State. Hon’ble
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.
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
First Bail Application No.158 of 2026 Sumit Thapliyal
…..….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand
….….Respondent Present:- Mr. Reituparna Joshi, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Rakesh Negi, Brief Holder for the State.
Hon’ble Siddhartha Sah, J. (Oral)
In the instant bail application, the applicant seeks release on bail in connection with FIR No.125 of 2025, dated 26.11.2025, under Sections 8/21/60 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Shyampur, District Haridwar on the ground of parity with the co-accused, which is identically situated as the applicant. The co-accused has been granted bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.01.2026, passed in First Bail Application No.24 of 2026, Anil Chadda Vs. State of Uttarakhand.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. Learned State Counsel does not deny the averments made by the learned counsel for the applicant.
2 The contraband (Smack) recovered from the application was 22.50 Grams.
4. The object of keeping the accused in detention during investigation is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.
5. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.
6. The bail application is allowed.
7. Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
(Siddhartha Sah, J.)
Vacation Judge
04.02.2026 Sanjay SANJAY KANOJIA Digitally signed by SANJAY KANOJIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=e50e50b49596520698eff87e0a08bbd 504686df4d1afc60f54a287831dec46fe, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=26EEB7122ED0DD23233A255D D8EC450A84B515A087CAEFD1B3179A7DEAE 40699, cn=SANJAY KANOJIA Date: 2026.02.04 17:21:19 +05'30'