Pritam v. State of Uttarakhand

SL. No. Dat e Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar's order with Signatures COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS

2026:UHC:3029

BA 1st No.358 of 2026 "Pritam Vs. State of Uttarakhand" Hon'ble Ashish Naithani, J.

Mr. Akshay Joshi, Mr. Anand Singh, learned counsel for the Applicant.

¶2Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.

¶3In the High Court of Uttarakhand, the present case arises from Bail Application filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking regular bail for the Applicant – Pritam, who has been accused in FIR No.412 of 2025, dated 23.11.2025, under Sections 8/22/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Act at Police Station Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar.

¶4The Applicant is being represented by the learned counsel, who submits for the consideration of the bail, that firstly Applicant has not been named in the FIR in the present crime and secondly there was no recovery made from his possession, only after having been named by the co-accused, his name has surfaced, and as such, whatever the prosecution has relied upon regarding Applicant being supplier of the said contraband does not link him with the present crime and grounds are sufficient for being enlarged on bail.

¶5Learned State Counsel submits that there is a linkage regarding the present crime as present matter involved commercial quantity of scheduled drugs, namely, Tramadol Hydrochloride weighing 649.88 grams. Referring to the Whatsapp chat between the co-accused and the Applicant, whereby it is said that whatever description of the chat between the Applicant and the co-accused clearly indicates that there is transaction of demand and supply chain between both of them, and thus, having a clear linkage and the role in the present matter, there are no grounds sufficient for bail, and it is requested that the Applicant may not be enlarged on bail.

¶6After hearing the rival submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds this present matter fit case for bail. Firstly, that the Applicant has not been named in the FIR. Secondly, the Applicant was linked after having been informed by the other co-accused regarding his role in the present matter, and whatever whatsapp chat, the learned State Counsel is referring, is a subject of the trial and at this juncture does not prima facie makes it a ground for rejection.

¶7Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the Applicant has made out a case for bail.

¶8Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that the Applicant - Pritam, who has been accused in FIR No.412 of 2025, dated 23.11.2025, under Sections 8/22/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Act at Police Station Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned court. The Applicant shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty granted to him.

(Ashish Naithani, J.)

23.04.2026 Nitesh/