Satayendra Singh Rawat v. State of Uttarakhand

I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

1 0 t h JANUARY, 2 0 2 6

FI RST BAI L APPLI CATI ON NO. 2 7 of 2 0 2 6

Satayendra Singh Rawat

..…Applicant

Versus

State of Uttarakhand

..…Respondent

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Pratul Kumar, Advocate

holding brief of Mr. Lokendra

Dobhal, Advocate.

Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Pradeep Lohani, Brief Holder.

Hon 'ble Alok Ku m ar Ver m a,J.

Applicant – Satayendra Singh Rawat is in judicial custody for the offence under Section 8 read with Section 20, Section 29 and Section 60 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, "Act, 1985") in Case Crime No.23 of 2025, registered at Police Station Narendra Nagar, District Tehri Garhwal. 2 .

According to the First Information Report, on

19.11.2025, the applicant Satayendra Singh Rawat and co-accused Shubhash Rawat were going in a car (Alto Car UK07TE4178). The said car was driving by Satayendra Singh Rawat (applicant). Seeing the police, the applicant turned his car and tried to go

back. They were apprehended by the police at 20: 10 hrs. The police recovered 678 gm. charas from a cloth bag kept in the said car. Applicant was searched. He was arrested at 22: 40 hrs. 3 .

Heard Mr. Pratul Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned Brief Holder for the respondent. 4 .

Mr. Pratul Kumar, Advocate, has contended that the applicant is innocent. The alleged charas was not recovered from the car. The recovery was planted. There was no independent witness at the time of the alleged recovery. This fact also makes the story of the police doubtful. Applicant has no criminal antecedents. He is a permanent resident of District Uttarkashi, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. The mandatory provisions of Section 42 and Section 50 of the Act, 1985 were not followed, and, the alleged recovered charas is less than commercial quantity. 5 .

Mr. Pradeep Lohani, Brief Holder, has opposed the bail application orally. 6 . As per the Table prepared under Section 2 (xxiii-a) and Section 2 (vii-a) of the said Act, 1985, lesser than 100 gm of charas is small quantity and greater than 01 Kilogram of charas is commercial quantity (Entry

No.23). 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.

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. 1 0 . Let the applicant – Satayendra Singh Rawat 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.

_ _ _ __ _ _ _

ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

Date : 10.01.2026 Pant