Anurag Rajput vs State Of Uttarakhand

Ravindra Maithani, J

Applicant is in judicial custody in Case Crime No. 438 of 2023, under Section 8/21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“the Act”), Police Station Ranipur, District Haridwar. He has sought his release on bail.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Delay Condonation Application Nos. 1 of 2024 and 2 of 2024 are allowed. Delay in filing the counter affidavit and supplementary affidavit is condoned. Counter affidavit and supplementary affidavit are taken on record.

According to the FIR, on 28.09.2023, 270 gram smack was allegedly recovered from the possession of the applicant.

It is the case of the applicant that it is a planted recovery. The applicant is in jail since 28.09.2023; there is no independent witness; it is case of non compliance of the provisions of the Act. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that according to the recovery memo, the recovery was made in the presence of Circle Officer (“CO”), but it is argued that CO has not signed the recovery memo which creates doubt in the prosecution case.

Learned State counsel admits that the recovery memo has not been signed by the CO.

According to the recovery memo, the recovery was made in the present of CO. It is he who seized the article, but the recovery memo has not been signed by the CO.

Having considered the entirety of facts, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

The bail application is allowed.

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.