BHUPENDRA SINGH ALIAS RAJU vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A. — BA1/885/2025

Case under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Act No. 61 of 1985) Section 8/21. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 18th April 2026.

CNR: UKHC010073152025

CASE DISPOSED

Filing Number

BA1/3673/2025

Filing Date

21-05-2025

Registration No

BA1/885/2025

Registration Date

21-05-2025

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

APPLICATIONS ( 5 )

Sub-Category

BAIL DURING INVESTIGATION ( 1 )

Judicial Branch

ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)

Decision Date

18th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Acts & Sections

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Act No. 61 of 1985) Section 8/21
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 109
Arms Act, 1959 (Act No. 54 of 1959) Section 3/25

Petitioner(s)

BHUPENDRA SINGH ALIAS RAJU

Adv. SAURABH KUMAR PANDEY,SARITA BISHT,SARITA BISHT, ,SARITA BISHT

Respondent(s)

STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A.

Hearing History

Judge: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra

22-05-2025

FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3

18-04-2026

BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254

17-04-2026

BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254

17-03-2026

BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254

13-02-2026

BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254

Orders

18-04-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra

Case Summary: BA1/885/2025 - Bhupendra Singh @ Raju v. State of Uttarakhand The court granted bail to the applicant charged with NDPS Act violations and Arms Act offenses. Although the recovered contraband quantity was commercial, the court found the recovery and incident "doubtful" due to procedural irregularities: arrest memo and inventory contained the FIR number despite a six-hour gap before FIR registration, with no corresponding entry in police records. Additionally, eight months after charge framing, no prosecution witnesses had been examined, violating the accused's right to speedy trial under Article 21. The court balanced personal liberty against delayed proceedings and approved bail on personal bond with two sureties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: BA1/885/2025 - Bhupendra Singh @ Raju v. State of Uttarakhand The court granted bail to the applicant charged with NDPS Act violations and Arms Act offenses. Although the recovered contraband quantity was commercial, the court found the recovery and incident "doubtful" due to procedural irregularities: arrest memo and inventory contained the FIR number despite a six-hour gap before FIR registration, with no corresponding entry in police records. Additionally, eight months after charge framing, no prosecution witnesses had been examined, violating the accused's right to speedy trial under Article 21. The court balanced personal liberty against delayed proceedings and approved bail on personal bond with two sureties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case