MOHSIN vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

UKHC010158032026
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures

SL.
Date
No.


2026:UHC:8132

COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS

BA2/148/2026
Mohsin --Applicant
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent


Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.

Ms Chitra Joshi, learned counsel for the
applicant.
2. Mr. Tumul Nainwal, learned AGA for
the State.
3. The instant bail application is moved
on behalf of the present applicant Mohsin,
S/o Mohd. Rahees, R/o Ware No.9, Gosiya
Masjid Alli Khan Hajrat Nagar Kashipur,
District Udham Singh Nagar praying for bail
in reference to Case Crime No.65 of 2021
wherein he is implicated and charge sheeted
for the offences punishable under Section
8/22 of NDPS Act with the charge of
recovery of the contraband of smack, which
is much below the commercial quantity.
4. It is argued by the learned counsel for
the applicant that infact in this case crime
number he was already enlarged on bail by
the order dated 19.03.2021 passed in BA1
No.578 of 2021 and during trial he could not
appear on some dates before the trial court
consequently the non-bailable-warrant was
issued and then he was arrested on
28.07.2026 and since then he is languishing in
jail. It is argued by learned counsel for the
applicant that the present applicant could not
appear before the trial court on the date fixed
since he was in judicial custody in relation to

Case Crime No.449 of 2024.
5. On the other side Mr. Tumul Nainwal,
learned AGA submits that the applicant is
indulged in such activities since long back
and after granting bail in the said case crime
number he was again involved in two cases
relating to the NDPS though those cases he is
already enlarged on bail and taking into
consideration that he repeatedly involved in
such activities, he does not deserve for bail.
However, he has not disputed that in this
case crime number the applicant was already
enlarged on bail by the Coordinate Bench of
this Court vide order dated 19.03.2021 and on
some dates he could not appear because of
the reason that he was in judicial custody in
relation to other case crime number. He
submits that if this applicant is enlarged on
bail some stringent conditions should be
imposed upon him so that he may not be
indulged in such activities in future.
6. After hearing the submissions of
learned counsel for the parties and taking
into consideration that the applicant was
already enlarged on bail in Case Crime
No.353 of 2022 by Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Kashipur on 23.06.2022 and he
was arrested subsequently due to his non
appearance before the trial court and the
non-bailable-warrant was issued and on the
execution of the same he was arrested, this
Court is of the view that taking into
consideration that the applicant was already
enlarged on bail and the quantity of the
contraband was very small quantity i.e. 5.16
gram of smack, this Court is of the view that
applicant deserves for bail.

7. Accordingly, without expressing any
opinion on the merit of the case, the bail
application is allowed.
8. Let the present applicant-Mohsin 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. After being released on bail the
applicant shall report to the nearest
Police Station twice in a month i.e. on
th
the first date and 15 of every month
and the concerned SHO shall record his
presence.
ii. The applicant shall provide his
mobile number to the concerned SHO
and the concerned SHO shall put his
mobile in strict surveillance.
iii. Before leaving the concerned
District the applicant will seek prior
permission from the trial court.
iv. These conditions shall continue
for nine months.


(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
10.09.2026
Arti