SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Bom) 409

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
Chandrabhan Janardhan Yadav - Applicant 
Versus 
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Criminal Bail Application No. 2254 Of 2024 With Criminal Bail Application No. 262 Of 2025 With Criminal Bail Application No. 266 Of 2025 With Criminal Bail Application No. 4709 Of 2024
Decided On : 04-03-2025

Advocate Appeared:
Mr. Ayaz Khan a/w Mr. Dilip Mishra, Ms. Zehra Charania and Ms.
Mallika Sharma, Advocates for Applicants in Criminal Bail Application Nos. 2254 of 2024, 262 of 2025 and 266 of 2025.
Dr. Samarth Shrikant Karmakar a/w Mr. Jayant M. Puranik & Ms.
Arsuma Suhel for Applicant in Bail Application No. 4709 of 2024
 Mr. Hitendra J. Dedhia, APP for Respondent No.1 – State in Criminal Bail Application Nos.2254 of 2024, 262 of 2025 and 266 of 2025.
Mr. Sukanta Karmakar, APP for Respondent No.1 – State in Criminal Bail Application Nos.4709 of 2024.

Strict adherence to statutory procedures under the NDPS Act is essential; non-compliance can lead to the grant of bail even in serious drug-related offences.

Headnote:

(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 8(c), 21(c), 22(c), 29, and 52A - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 465, 468, 471, and 473 - Bail applications filed by accused in connection with drug-related offences - Prosecution's case based on recovery of contraband and WhatsApp chats - Non-compliance with statutory procedures under NDPS Act noted, particularly regarding the issuance of certificates under Section 52A - Court emphasizes the importance of following prescribed procedures to ensure the integrity of the prosecution's case. (Paras 5, 12, 13, 30)

(B) Bail - Grant of bail under NDPS Act - The court must be satisfied of the twin conditions under Section 37 for granting bail, which includes reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and that they are not likely to commit further offences - The court found that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against certain accused due to procedural lapses. (Paras 11, 12, 21)

Facts of the case:
Four bail applications were filed by accused involved in a drug trafficking case, where significant quantities of controlled substances were allegedly recovered. The prosecution's case relied on recovery, disclosure statements, and WhatsApp chats. The accused argued procedural non-compliance in the investigation.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the prosecution did not sufficiently comply with statutory requirements, particularly regarding the issuance of certificates under Section 52A of the NDPS Act, leading to the conclusion that the accused were entitled to bail.

Issues: The main issues included the adequacy of evidence against the accused, the procedural compliance of the prosecution, and the implications of non-compliance with the NDPS Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that strict adherence to statutory procedures is essential for the integrity of the prosecution's case, and non-compliance can lead to the grant of bail even under stringent laws like the NDPS Act.

Result: All four bail applications are allowed.

JUDGMENT :

1. Criminal Bail Application No.2254 of 2024 is filed by Accused No.6. Criminal Bail Application No.262 of 2025 is filed by Accused No.4. Criminal Bail Application No.266 of 2025 is filed by Accused No.5. Criminal Bail Application No.4709 of 2024 is filed by Accused No.2.

2. Mr. Khan, learned Advocate represent Accused Nos.4, 5 and 6. Mr. Karmarkar, learned Advocate represent Accused No.2. Since all above four Bail Applications arise out of the same crime, they are heard together and disposed by this common order, though by order dated 12.02.2025, applications of Accused Nos.4, 5 and 6 were tagged together.

3. For convenience, Applicants shall be referred to by their respective nomenclature as Accused in the charge-sheet.

4. Heard Mr. Khan, learned Advocate for Accused Nos.4, 5 and 6, Mr. Karmarkar, learned Advocate for Accused No.2, Mr. Dedhia, learned APP for Respondent No.1 – State and Mr. Karmakar, learned APP for Respondent No.1 – State.

5. Briefly stated, prosecution case is as under:-

5.1. All Four Bail Applications are arising in connection with CR.No.69 of 2023 for offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 21(c), 22(c) and 29 of NDPS Act, [The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.] read with Sections 465, 468, 471 and 473 of IPC, [The Indian Penal Code, 1860.]

5.2. On 01.08.2023, at 23:00 hours in a chance recovery, Accused No.1 was apprehended by prosecution with alleged contraband of 100 bottles of Codeine Phosphate & Chlorpheniramine Malete Syrup 100 ml, DASLIN – CD+’, [Codeine Phosphate & Chlorpheniramine Malete Syrup 100 ml, DASLIN – CD+: A brand of cough syrup packed and sold in configuration of 100 ml containing (5mg/10ml) of ‘Codeine Phosphate’.] containing Codeine Phosphate[Codeine Phosphate: A substance listed at Sr. No. 28 of the Table as per sub-clause (viia) of Section 2 of NDPS Act having ‘small quantity’ as 10 gm and ‘commercial quantity’ as 1 kg.] which is admittedly commercial quantity. On inquiry, he disclosed the name of Accused No.2 as supplier. Prosecution raided house of Accused No.2 on the same night and recovered 42 boxes containing 4200 bottles of the same contraband and 900 tablets of ‘Nitrazepam Tablets – IP Nitravet’,[Nitrazepam Tablets – IP Nitravet: A brand of medicine sold in tablet form, each tablet containing 10 mg of ‘Nitrazepam’, generally used for the Treatment of Insomnia.] containing Nitrazepam[Nitrazepam: A substance listed at Sr. No. 221 of the Table as per sub-clause (viia) of Section 2 of NDPS Act having ‘small quantity’ as 20 gm and ‘commercial quantity’ as 500 gm.] from his possession. Accused No.2 disclosed name of Accused No.3 as supplier of Nitrazepam Tablets and Accused Nos.4 and 5 as suppliers of Codeine Phosphate syrup bottles. Common panchnama qua Accused Nos.1 and 2 was completed at 04:25 hours on 02.08.2023 and thereafter FIR was lodged. Accused Nos.1 and 2 were arrested by following due process of law. However, Mr. Khan has seriously disputed this position which is addressed hereinunder.

5.3. On the following day i.e. on 03.08.2023 at 17:15 hours prosecution intercepted Accused No.3 outside his house and recovered 375 tablets of Alprazolam Tablets IP 0.5 mg’[Alprazolam Tablets IP 0.5 mg: A brand of medicine sold in tablet form, each tablet containing 0.5 gm of ‘Alprazolam’ generally used to treat Anxiety by altering brain activity and providing relief from panic attacks by relieving the nerves.] containing Alprazolam[Alprazolam: A Psychotropic Substance listed at Sr. No. 178 of the Table as per sub-clause (viia) of Section 2 of NDPS Act having ‘small quantity’ as 5 gm and ‘commercial quantity’ as 100 gm.] from his conscious possession which is admittedly intermediate quantity. Prosecution also recovered 530 strips of Combipack of Mifeprostone Tablets IP and Misoprostol Tablets IP CLEAR – KIT’[Misoprostol Tablets IP: A brand of abortifacients sold in tablet form, each strip containing 5 tablets each having 200 mcg of ‘Mifeprostone’ and ‘Misoprostol

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top