IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated: Nainital: the 11th day of June 2008 II Criminal Bail Application No.397 of 2008 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Hira Singh, S/o Sri Ratan Singh, R/o Village Sunai Khat, Lakheu, P.C. Badrauli, Chakrata, District Dehradun. ….Applicant(In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand ------ Opposite party _______________________________________________________ _ Arising out of Case Crime No.4 of 2007 U/S.8/20 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Chakrata, District Dehradun. Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Sri R.P. Nautiyal, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Tanuj Semwal, learned AGA for the State. This is the second bail application moved by the applicant. The first bail application was dismissed as not pressed on 18.12.2007. In brief the prosecution case is that on 04.06.2007 at 01:20 P.M. at Chakrata Gate, Gurudwara Road, Police Station Chakrata, District Dehradun 2½ Kg. CHARAS was said to be recovered from the possession of the accused/applicant. With the same averments, the First Information Report was lodged by Sri Ram Kumar Juyal, Station Officer Chakrata, District Dehradun on 04.06.2007 at 03:10 P.M. at Police Station Chakrata, District Dehradun. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the recovered item was not weighed at the spot and it cannot be said definitely that the recovered item was two and half Kg in weight. Learned counsel for the accused/applicant has further submitted that this fact is not mentioned in the recovery memo that the recovered item was weighed on the spot. On the other hand, learned AGA has submitted that the recovered item was 2½ Kg. and the same quantity is mentioned in the FARD and same fact also reiterated in Para- 13 of the counter affidavit filed by Vimal Tamta, Station Officer, Police Station Chakrata, District Dehradun. Learned AGA has further submitted that recovered item is a commercial quantity and as per Section 37 (1) (b) (ii) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 2 the applicant is not entitled for bail. He has further submitted that on the basis of the evidence collected by the Investigating Officer, no person- accused for offences involving commercial quantity shall be released on bail or on his own bond; unless the Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. After considering all the facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion about the final merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the accused/applicant does not deserve bail at this stage. Accordingly the II bail application is rejected. (Dharam Veer, J.) 11.06.2008 NCM