BA1/1703/2021 of NAND PAL BISHT Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

Court: Uttarakhand High Court
Decision date: 2022-09-16
Case number: 1703 of 2021

Parties

BA1/1703/2021 of NAND PAL BISHT (PETITIONER)
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND (RESPONDENT)

Full text

solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus

Show all Body

|**SL.** **No**|**Date**|**Office Notes,** **reports, orders or** **proceedings or** **directions and** **Registrar’s order** **with Signatures**||**COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS**|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|||||BA1 No.1703 of 2021 **Hon’ble R.C. Khulbe, J.** Mr. Niranjan Bhatt, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr. Pankaj Joshi, learned B.H. for the State. This is the first bail application moved on behalf of applicant–Nand Pal Bisht, who is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime/FIR No.23/2021 u/s 8/20, 51 of the NDPS Act, registered at P.S. Muni-Ki-Reti, District Tehri Garhwal, has sought his release on bail. It is argued that the accused has been falsely implicated; he is languishing in jail since 01.04.2021; there is no independent witness of the recovery; the police party did not comply with the provision of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act; he is ready to furnish the sureties and may be granted bail. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed for bail. As per the recovery memo, on 01.04.2021, when the police party was on patrolling duty, they received an information from the informer; accordingly, the police party reached at the spot; in the meantime, the accused were interrogated by the police; accordingly, they disclosed about the contraband article; thereafter, the police party informed the accused about their rights as envisaged under Section 50 of the NDPS Act and the consent letter was obtained; the police party immediately informed the C.O., who reached at the spot; the search was conducted and,|

|||||accordingly, 1150 gram Charas was recovered from the accused. As regard to the compliance of Section 50 of NDPS Act is concerned, admittedly, the contraband article was recovered from the possession of the accused, but before taking search the accused was informed about his right; as per Section 50 of the NDPS Act, he gave his consent; accordingly, the police party informed his Superior Officer (C.O.), who reached at the spot being Gazetted Officer in whose presence search was conducted; the contraband article comes within the definition of the commercial quantity. Looking to the gravity of the offence, it is not fit case for bail at this stage; accordingly, the bail application is liable to be dismissed. The bail application is thus, dismissed. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of. **(R.C. Khulbe, J.)** **16.09.2022** BS| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|