Lovepreet vs State Of Uttarakhand

Ravindra Maithani, J

Applicant is in judicial custody in FIR No. 06 of 2023, under Sections 20/29/8 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“the Act”), Police Station Pulbhatta, District Udham Singh Nagar. He has sought his release on bail.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

According to the FIR, charas in commercial quantity was allegedly recovered from the possession of the applicant on 09.01.2023.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that after his arrest, the applicant is in jail for a long; charge sheet was submitted in the case on 16.08.2023; charge was framed on 01.09.2023; but since then, no witness has been examined.

Learned State counsel admits that witnesses never appeared in this case.

It is a case of recovery of commercial quantity of charas and in such cases Section 37 of the Act makes specific provisions. Bail in such cases may not be granted, unless the Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. But, denial of bail does not give unfettered liberty to the prosecution to keep a person in custody without conducting a trial.

The applicant is in custody for more than a year. For more than six months in between not even a single witness was examined.

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.