Anil Ladwal v. State of Uttarakhand

SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar's order with Signatures UKHC010083892026

2026:UHC:7233

COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS

BA3/22/2026 Anil Ladwal

--Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand

--Respondent

Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.

Mr. Lalit Sharma, Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey and Mr. Abhishek Joshi, learned counsel for the applicant.

¶2Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned AGA for the State.

¶3This is the third bail application. The first bail application was rejected by the Coordinate Bench on

20.09.2025 and thereafter the second bail application was also rejected on 24.02.2026 and now the instant third bail application is moved on the ground that the applicant suffered long incarceration of more than one year.

¶4Present applicant Anil Ladwal, S/o Shri Raj Kumar is praying for bail in reference to first information report dated

21.03.2025 bearing FIR No.120 of 2025, P.S. Ranipur, District Haridwar for the offences punishable under Section 8/22/27-A of the NDPS Act. Recovered narcotic and psychotropic drug is commercial one.

¶5The instant third bail application is moved on two grounds firstly the inventory though prepared at the time of search and seizure but not certified by the Magistrate concerned in the manner as provided under 2022 Rules and as such there is no substantial compliance of Section 52-A of NDPS Act. Another ground is of long incarceration, which the applicant suffered since last more than one year. In this regard, it is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the present applicant is languishing in jail since

21.03.2025 and there is no substantial progress in the trial, therefore, taking into consideration the period, which he has suffered, the rider of Section 37 of NDPS Act may be dispensed with. In addition to the aforesaid two grounds, learned counsel also submits that the applicant infact is doing the work of logistic to transport the material from one place to another place, therefore, he cannot held to be responsible for the alleged contraband and in support of this the quotation for consignment dated 01.05.2024 is also placed on record by way of supplementary affidavit of M/s Windlas Biotech Ltd. including the tracking ID. Apart from this, it is also submitted that the applicant have previous criminal antecedents, therefore, if he is enlarged on bail there is no possibility that the applicant after being released shall indulged in such activities.

¶6Finally it is argued that since twin condition in terms of Section 37 of NDPS Act are fulfilled, therefore, the applicant deserves for bail.

¶7On the other side, Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned AGA have not disputed that the charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant have no criminal antecedents however since the contraband recovered is commercial one, therefore, in terms of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the applicant does not deserve for bail .

¶8After hearing the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and in view of the discussion, as above since the twin conditions as stipulated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act are fulfilled, therefore, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves for bail.

¶9Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the instant third bail application is allowed.

¶10Let the present applicant-Anil Ladwal 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 subject to the following conditions:- "i. Applicant shall join the trial court proceeding on each and every date without seeking any unnecessary adjournment. ii. The applicant shall not indulge in any such activities in future and will not make any attempt to temper with the evidence."

In breach of any conditions as aforesaid, the prosecution is free to move an application for cancellation of bail.

(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)

13.08.2026 Arti