MOHD ANZAR vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A. — BA1/2160/2025

Case under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Act No. 61 of 1985) Section 8/22/29/60. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 29th May 2026.

CNR: UKHC010177412025

CASE DISPOSED

Filing Number

BA1/9206/2025

Filing Date

07-11-2025

Registration No

BA1/2160/2025

Registration Date

07-11-2025

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

29th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Acts & Sections

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Act No. 61 of 1985) Section 8/22/29/60

Petitioner(s)

MOHD ANZAR

Adv. VISHWA PRAKASH BAHUGUNA

Respondent(s)

STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A.

Hearing History

Judge: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra

11-11-2025

FRESH CASES AS DEFECTIVE -236

28-05-2026

BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254

10-02-2026

BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254

29-12-2025

BAIL ORDER MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -254

08-12-2025

FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3

Orders

29-05-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra

Case Summary: BA1/2160/2025 - Mohd Anzar v. State of Uttarakhand The Uttarakhand High Court granted regular bail to Mohd Anzar, arrested for alleged possession of pharmaceutical drugs (Tramadol, Acetaminophen, Dicyclomine, and Alprazolam) under NDPS Act sections 8/22/29/60. The court found prima facie procedural irregularities undermining the prosecution's credibility: the FIR/Case Crime number appeared on documents (inventory report and arrest memo) allegedly prepared before FIR registration, and seized samples took 13 days to reach FSL Chandigarh despite being only 3 hours away, with no satisfactory explanation for the transit delay. Applying the Supreme Court's principle in *Narcotics Control Bureau v. Kashif*, the court held substantial procedural lapses and unexplained delays concerning sample custody warranted bail, citing the applicant's clean criminal record and prolonged custody since September 2025. Bail was granted subject to regular court attendance, non-interference with witnesses, and travel restrictions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: BA1/2160/2025 - Mohd Anzar v. State of Uttarakhand The Uttarakhand High Court granted regular bail to Mohd Anzar, arrested for alleged possession of pharmaceutical drugs (Tramadol, Acetaminophen, Dicyclomine, and Alprazolam) under NDPS Act sections 8/22/29/60. The court found prima facie procedural irregularities undermining the prosecution's credibility: the FIR/Case Crime number appeared on documents (inventory report and arrest memo) allegedly prepared before FIR registration, and seized samples took 13 days to reach FSL Chandigarh despite being only 3 hours away, with no satisfactory explanation for the transit delay. Applying the Supreme Court's principle in *Narcotics Control Bureau v. Kashif*, the court held substantial procedural lapses and unexplained delays concerning sample custody warranted bail, citing the applicant's clean criminal record and prolonged custody since September 2025. Bail was granted subject to regular court attendance, non-interference with witnesses, and travel restrictions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case