Bhoora Vs State OUttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court 2 Jan 2026 Second Bail Application No. 294 Of 2025 (2026) 01 UK CK 0508
Bench: Single Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Second Bail Application No. 294 Of 2025

Hon'ble Bench

Alok Kumar Verma, J

Advocates

Reema Rana, Pratiroop Pandey

Final Decision

Allowed

Acts Referred
  • Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 8, 20, 29, 60

Judgement Text

Translate:

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1. The Applicant -Bhoora is in judicial custody for the offence under Section 8 read with Section 20, Section 60 and Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 in Case Crime No.57 of 2025, registered at Kotwali Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar.

2. The First Bail Application (BA1 No.2165 of 2025) was dismissed on 12.11.2025 as withdrawn granting liberty to the applicant to file afresh.

3. According to the First Information Report dated 28.01.2025, the police apprehended the co-accused Hori Lal. He was on motorcycle (Splendor Registration No.UK04L8400). The police recovered 2 kg. 121 gm. charas from a polythene bag hanging on the right handle of the said motorcycle. He was arrested. He told the police that the said charas was brought by him from Bhoora (applicant).

4. Heard Ms. Reema Rana, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned Assistant Government Advocate for the respondent.

5. Ms. Reema Rana, Advocate, for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated by the co-accused. Applicant was not involved in the alleged offence. He has no criminal antecedents. He is a permanent resident of District Bareilly (Uttar Pradesh), therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding, and, he is in custody since 10.10.2025.

6. Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, Assistant Government Advocate, has opposed the bail application. However, he submitted on instructions that no evidence has been found till date to indicate that the applicant was involved in selling and buying of contraband.

7. The object of keeping the accused in detention during the investigation is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused. There is nothing on record to indicate that the applicant had earlier been involved in any unacceptable activities.

8. 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.

9. The Bail Application is allowed.

10. Let the applicant - Bhoora be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

From The Blog
Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Read More
Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Read More