Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/973/2025 on 22 July, 2025
Author: Rakesh Thapliyal
Bench: Rakesh Thapliyal
2025:UHC:6387
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
BA1 No. 973 of 2025
Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
1. Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for
the applicant.
2. Ms. Pushpa Bhatt, learned AAG along
with Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned AGA for
the State.
3. Present applicant-Aqil S/o Maqsood,
is seeking bail in relation to first
information report dated 27.04.2025
bearing FIR No. 0459 of 2025, Police Station
Laksar, District Haridwar, wherein the
present applicant along with one Aklakh
have been implicated for the offences
punishable under Section 8/21 of the NDPS
Act, 1985.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for
the applicant that the present applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated
and the alleged contraband, which is shown
to be recovered from the present applicant,
is below commercial quantity i.e. 79.36
gram of Smack. Apart from this, he submits
that there is no proper substantial
compliance of Sections 40, 43 and 50 of the
NDPS Act, and as such, the alleged
recovery, as shown, is planted one.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant
further argued that there are two more
cases against the present applicant related
to the NDPS Act, in which he is already
bailed out and except these two cases, he
has no previous criminal history and now
the applicant is languishing in jail since
27.04.2025, therefore, he may be enlarged
on bail.
6. On the other side, Ms. Pushpa Bhatt,
2025:UHC:6387
learned AAG for the State vehemently
opposed the bail application and on the
basis of the written instruction submits that
the applicant is a history-sheeter and in
seven criminal cases, he has been
implicated, out of which, five cases related
to the NDPS Act. She also submits that a
false statement has been given by the
deponent on his affidavit that in only two
cases, the applicant has been implicated
since as many as, there are seven criminal
cases against the present applicant. The
details of these criminal cases are as
follows:-
i. Case Crime No.241 of 2017 for the offence
punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act.
ii. Case Crime No.27 of 2015 for the offence
punishable under Section 307, 452 and 504 IPC.
iii. Case Crime No.538 of 2020 for the offences
punishable under Section 8/21 of the NDPS Act
read with Section 25 of the Arms Act.
iv. Case Crime No.684 of 2021 for the offences
punishable under Section 8/21 of the NDPS Act.
v. Case Crime No. 961 of 2021 for the offences
punishable under Section 8/21 of the NDPS Act.
vi. Case Crime No.723 of 2020 for the offences
punishable under Section 8/21 of the NDPS Act.
vii. Case Crime No.829 of 2021 for the offences
punishable under Section 8/21/29 of the NDPS
Act.
7. After taking into consideration the
long history of the present applicant, and,
the false statement as given by the
deponent in his affidavit about criminal
antecedents of the applicant, this Court is
of the view that the applicant does not
deserve for bail.
8. Accordingly, the bail application is
rejected.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
22.07.2025
R.Bisht
2025:UHC:6387
[ad_1]
Source link