Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ARAVIND KUMAR, N. V. ANJARIA, JJ.
Union of India – Appellant
Versus
Vigin K. Varghese – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 4857 of 2025 (@ Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s). 7768 of 2025) With Criminal Appeal No. 4858 of 2025 (@ Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s). 11097 of 2025)
Decided On : 13-11-2025
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – Section 37 – Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – Section 483 – Grant of bail – Challenge as to – While granting bail, High Court recorded that there were no antecedents against applicant – Material before Court includes Union’s assertion that respondent had already been apprehended in connection with earlier seizure of approximately 198.1 kilograms of Methamphetamine and 9.035 kilograms of Cocaine allegedly imported through same channel only days before present seizure – That assertion is neither noticed nor answered in impugned orders – It is statutory threshold under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) which would disentitle discretionary relief and grant of bail must necessarily rest on careful appraisal of material available – Offences involving commercial quantity of narcotic drugs stand on a distinct statutory footing – Section 37 enacts specific embargo on grant of bail – Impugned orders of High Court set aside and matters remitted to High Court for fresh consideration of respondent’s prayer for bail – Until High Court takes a decision, and purely as an interim arrangement, respondent shall continue to have benefit flowing from impugned orders including terms and conditions of bail as presently operative. (Paras 16, 17, 18, 20, 21 and 22)
Facts of the case:
Present appeals, being Special Leave Petition (Crl.) Nos. 7768 of 2025 and 11097 of 2025, are directed against the orders dated 22.01.2025 and 12.03.2025 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay granting bail to the respondent accused Vigin K. Varghese on prosecutions instituted by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
Findings of Court:
Interests of justice would be met if impugned orders are set aside and matter is remitted to High Court for fresh consideration of the respondent’s prayer for bail, keeping in view the parameters of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, nature and quantity of contraband alleged to have been seized including 50.232 kilograms of Cocaine on 06.10.2022 and 07.10.2022, role attributed to the respondent in the said import, allegation of his involvement in an earlier seizure of 198.1 kilograms of methamphetamine and 9.035 kilograms of cocaine in early October 2022, period of custody undergone since October 2022, and the stage of trial before the Special Court.
Result : Criminal Appeals disposed of with directions.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the case and evidence. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. reasoning for bail granted by high court. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 3. arguments from the parties regarding bail. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. court's analysis of bail conditions and material. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. remittance for fresh consideration of bail. (Para 21) |
| 6. final order and disposal of appeal. (Para 22 , 23) |
JUDGMENT
ARAVIND KUMAR, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. These appeals, being Special Leave Petition (Crl.) Nos. 7768 of 2025 and 11097 of 2025, are directed against the orders dated 22.01.2025 and 12.03.2025 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay granting bail to the respondent accused Vigin K. Varghese on prosecutions instituted by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as “NDPS Act”. The first order, rendered in Criminal Bail Application No. 1416 of 2024, relates to the seizure of approximately 50.232 kilograms of Cocaine imported from South Africa in the name of M/s Yummito International Foods India Pvt. Ltd., of which the respondent is a Director. The second order, rendered in Criminal Bail Application No. 1540 of 2024, granted bail on the ground of parity in a connected prosecution arising from a seizure effected within a few days of the first. As both appeals concern the same accused, the same investigating agency, and substantially overlapping facts and legal issues, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order.
3. On 05.10.2022, Officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Mumbai Zonal Unit, acting on specific information, identified a refrigerated shipping container bearing No. MSDU-9809038, declared to contain pallets of pears, imported from South Africa in the name of M/s Yummito International Foods India Pvt. Ltd. The respondent is stated to be a Director and the operative mind of said concern. The container was escorted from the terminal at Jawaharlal Nehru Port to EFC Logistics CFS for examination in the presence of two independent panch witnesses and the respondent.
4. On 06.10.2022 and 07.10.2022, upon opening the said container and segregating the cartons, officers allegedly recovered fifty brick-shaped white packets concealed within cartons of green apples (pears) that were intermixed with the declared consignment of pears. On weighment, these packets were found to weigh approximately 50.232 kilograms. Field testing indicated the presence of cocaine. The contraband was seized under a panchnama dated 06.10.2022 and 07.10.2022.
5. Statements of the respondent came to be recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act wherein it is alleged that he admitted to ordering the consignment from a South African supplier, to having imported the goods using the Import Export Code of his firm, and for supervising the clearance and delivery operations through his logistics handlers. The Directorate further alleges that he identified one Mansoor Thachaparamban as his overseas collaborator who arranged the shipments and that the respondent described the commercial arrangement and coordination undertaken for the consignments.
6. The Directorate also asserts that the present seizure was not isolated. On 02.10.2022, in a separate operation, approximately 198.1 kilograms of Methamphetamine and 9.035 kilograms of Cocaine had been seized, allegedly traceable to the same network involving the respondent and the aforesaid Mansoor Thachaparamban. A separate complaint bearing No. 428 of 2023 in respect of that seizure stands filed before the Special Court for NDPS cases, Panvel. The Union relies on this to show antecedent involvement.
7. The respondent came to be arrested in October 2022 and has remained in custody since then. Upon completion of investigation, a complaint came to be filed before the Special Court on or about 01.04.2023, registered as DRI/MZU/C/INT-96/2022. The application for bail preferred by the respondent was re
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
