Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2026 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. High Court Of Uttarakhand/
  4. 2024/
  5. November

Yusuf Baig vs. State of Uttarakhand

Decided on 28 November 2024• Citation: BA1/2262/2024• High Court of Uttarakhand
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                   HIGH   COURT    OF  UTTARAKHAND        AT  NAINITAL              
                             st                                                     
                           1  Bail Application No. 2262  of 2024                    
                  Yusuf Baig                              ….....Applicant           
                                           Versus                                   
                  State of Uttarakhand                     .….Respondent            
                  Present:-                                                         
                       Mr. Mani Kumar, Advocate for the applicant.                  
                       Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, AGA for the State.                   
                  Hon’ble  Ravindra   Maithani,  J. (Oral)                          
                            Applicant Yusuf Baig is in judicial custody in FIR      
                 No. 370  of 2024, under Section 8/17 of the Narcotic Drugs         
                 and  Psychotropic  Substances  Act, 1985  (“the Act”), P.S.        
                 Khatima,  District Udham  Singh  Nagar. He has  sought his         
                 release on bail.                                                   
                 2.         Heard   learned  counsel  for the  parties and          
                 perused  the record.                                               
                 3.         According  to the FIR, on 15.11.2024, 307  gms.         
                 Opium   was allegedly recovered from the possession of the         
                 applicant.                                                         
                 4.         It is the case of the applicant that he is innocent;    
                 it is a case of non-compliance of the provisions of the Act.       
                 Learned  counsel  for the applicant would submit  that the         
                 allegedly recovered quantity is less than commercial;  the         
                 applicant has no criminal history.                                 

                                              2                                     
                 5.         Learned  counsel  for the State admits that the         
                 applicant has no criminal history.                                 
                 6.         Having  considered, this Court is of the view that      
                 it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be         
                 enlarged on bail.                                                  
                 7.         The bail application is allowed.                        
                 8.         Let  the applicant be released on  bail, on his         
                 executing  a  personal bond   and  furnishing two  reliable        
                 sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the      
                 court concerned.                                                   
                                                   (Ravindra Maithani, J)           
                                                          28.11.2024                
                  Avneet/