Allowed¶2

Ahsan v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC1 Dec 2025BA1/2278/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-Judge bail order in BA1 No. 2278 of 2025 (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) granting bail to applicant Ahsan, implicated in FIR No. 1134 of 2024, P.S. Laksar, District Haridwar, under Section 8/20 read with Section 60 of the NDPS Act for alleged recovery of 11.64 gram smack; bail allowed as the quantity is non-commercial and a final report was filed in an earlier similar case; release on personal bond with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted; applicant Ahsan to be released on executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. ¶2

Ahsan Vs State of Uttarakhand — Narcotics (NDPS) | Uttarakhand HC (2025)

¶1

SL. No.	Date	Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures	COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
			BA1 No. 2278 of 2025 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. (Through V.C.) 1. Mr. Mohd. Matloob, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Present applicant Ahsan, S/o Paravash is praying for bail in reference to FIR dated 11.11.2025, registered as FIR No. 1134 of 2024 at P.S. Laksar District Haridwar wherein the present applicant has been implicated for the offence punishable under Section 8/20 read with Section 60 of the NDPS Act. 4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the alleged contraband which is shown to be recovered from the present applicant is 11.64 gram smack which is much below the commercial quantity, and, furthermore, there is no substantial compliance of mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act. He further submits that earlier the applicant has been implicated in the case of similar allegation, however, on completion of investigation final report has been filed and in the present case the applicant is languishing in jail since 11.11.2025. 5. On the other side, Mr. Pratiroop Pandey learned A.G.A. for the State has not disputed that the alleged contraband which is shown to be recovered from the applicant is much below the commercial

¶2

quantity. 6. After hearing the arguments of the
learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the alleged
contraband which is shown to be recovered is non-commercial and
furthermore in earlier case final report
has already been filed, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant Ahsan be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 01.12.2025 Parul

Ahsan v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ahsan v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sharifa Baigum Vs State of Uttarakhand

Kuldeep Nandrajog Vs State of Uttarakhand

Mohammed Rafi Vs State of Uttarakhand

Kuldeep Nandrajog Vs State of Uttarakhand

Surendra Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand

Prem Vishwash Vs State of Uttarakhand