Allowed¶7

Anmol Kumar Agarwal v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC9 Jul 2026BA1/1193/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail — NDPS Act, Section 8/20 — alleged recovery of 5.987 kg ganja — non-commercial quantity — no criminal antecedent — applicant in custody since 10.06.2026 — FIR No. 0184 of 2026, P.S. Ramnagar, District Nainital — Anmol Kumar Agarwal v. State of Uttarakhand, BA1/1193/2026, decided 09-07-2026 by Rakesh Thapliyal, J. — bail allowed without opinion on merits; personal bond and two sureties of like amount.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. ¶7

SL.
No.

Date

Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures

COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
BA1/1193/2026

Anmol Kumar Agarwal
--Applicant
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand
--Respondent

Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.

1.
Ms. Sheetal Selwal, learned counsel for
the applicant.
2.
Mr. Tumul Nainwal, learned A.G.A. for
the State.

3.
Present
applicant
Anmol
Kumar
Agarwal S/o Late Shri Sanjeev Kumar
Agarwal is praying for bail in reference to
FIR dated 10.06.2026 bearing FIR No. 0184 of
2026 P.S. Ramnagar District Nainital wherein
he has been implicated for the offence
punishable under Section 8/20 of the NDPS
Act.
4.
It is argued by the learned counsel for
the applicant that the applicant is innocent
and has been falsely implicated and alleged
contraband which is shown to be recovered
from the present applicant is 5.987 kg ganja
which is non commercial quantity and with
regard to the recovery as shown, in fact, there
is no substantial compliance of mandatory
provisions of the NDPS Act. She argued that
present applicant is languishing in jail since
10.06.2026 and have no criminal antecedent.
5.
Per
contra,
Mr.
Tumul
Nainwal,
learned A.G.A. on instructions have not
disputed about the past criminal antecedent
and submits that the applicant has no
criminal antecedent and have also not
disputed that alleged contraband which is
shown to be recovered is non commercial

quantity. 6. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the quantity of alleged contraband is non commercial and the applicant has no criminal antecedent, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant “Anmol Kumar
Agarwal” 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.) 09-07-2026 Parul

quantity.
6.
After hearing the arguments of the
learned counsel for the parties and taking
into consideration that the quantity of
alleged contraband is non commercial and
the applicant has no criminal antecedent, this
Court is of the view that the applicant
deserves for bail.
7.
Accordingly, without expressing any
opinion on the merit of the case the bail
application is allowed.
8.
Let the applicant “Anmol Kumar

Agarwal” 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.)
09-07-2026
Parul

Anmol Kumar Agarwal v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anmol Kumar Agarwal 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

Rahul Thakur Alias Rahul Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand

Umer Khan and Ors. Vs State of Uttarakhand

Urmila Bisht Vs State of Uttarakhand

Rajesh Vs State of Uttarakhand

Sandesh Sabhaji Chiplekar Vs State of Uttarakhand

Kamla Mehra Vs State of Uttarakhand