IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Neela Gokhale, J.
Arbaz Aslam Shaikh - Applicant
Versus
State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Bail Application No.429 of 2025
Decided On : 21-11-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts leading to the bail application (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments presented by both parties (Para 9 , 10) |
| 3. court's analysis and reasoning on bail (Para 11 , 13 , 14 , 19 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 4. interpretation of statutory requirements for bail (Para 12 , 18) |
| 5. final ruling on the bail application (Para 25) |
JUDGMENT :
Neela Gokhale, J.
1. The Applicant seeks his release on bail in connection with C.R. No.92 of 2023 dated 3rd November, 2023, registered with the ANC, Azad Maidan Unit, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 22(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ('NDPS Act').
2. The facts of the case, in brief are that, on 2nd November, 2023, when the officials of the ANC, Azad Maidan Unit, were out for patrolling, at about 10:30 p.m., they found one person lurking in suspicious circumstances near the Jogeshwari Police station bus stop next to an electric pole on the service road, Western Express Highway, Southwards, Jogeshwari (E). The Police made enquiries with him and asked him for his identity. The said person started running away on his two-wheeler, the Police stopped him. They identified themselves as Police Officers and started questioning him. Since he gave evasive answers, the Police detained him and proceeded to comply with the statutory provisions of the NDPS Act, including getting Panchas and other material, etc. On his personal search, 100 grams of Mephedrone (MD) was recovered from him. The said contraband was placed in a plastic pouch and stapled. The plastic pouch was in turn kept in an envelope, which was sealed and marked as Exhibit 'A'. The said person was identified as Hardik Chandubhai Solanki, namely, the Accused No.1.
3. Said Solanki told the Police that he was using the two- wheeler to distribute the contraband. He also told the Police that one Adam Hussain was his supplier and offered to take them to Adam. The Police proceeded with the patrolling to nab said Adam since, they had an apprehension that he will abscond once he learnt about the arrest of Solanki. Thus, they proceeded to look for Adam, as per Solanki’s directions.
4. Solanki took the Police to the shop of one Raza, a key- maker, from which place, Adam operated. Thus, the Police set a trap for Adam. One person came and appeared to be waiting for someone. Solanki identified the said person as Adam. The Police apprehended Adam. After complying with the statutory provisions of the NDPS Act, the Police searched him. When the Police questioned him as to his supplier, he revealed that he had purchased it from the Applicant, who resided in Kalina, Santacruz. Thus, the Police continued their patrolling, keeping a lookout for the persons involved in the crime.
5. The Police went to the location revealed by Adam. On seeing the police, the Applicant attempted to run away. However, the Police caught up with him and apprehended him. After following the due process of law, the Police searched the Applicant and recovered 100 grams of Mephedrone in a plastic pouch from the left pocket of his kurta. In this manner, the Applicant came to be arrested on 3rd November 2023.
6. The Applicant made an application seeking bail before the Special Court, NDPS Act, Greater Bombay. However, by order dated 19th September 2024, the said bail application was rejected. Hence, the Applicant has filed the present Bail Application for the relief as prayed.
7. Both the counsels sought time to place on record their written submissions. The same are filed by both the counsels on 17th and 18th November 2025 respectively. The same are taken on record.
8. Mr. Sherali Khan, learned counsel, represented the Applicant and Ms. Megha Bajoria, learned APP, represented the State.
9. Mr. Khan's arguments are as under:
i) Compliance under Section 42 of the NDPS Act is not made as once the Accused No.2 - Adam shared information regarding the present Applicant, the same ought to have been reproduced in writing and sent to the superior
The statutory requirements for bail under the NDPS Act necessitate proof of reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty, which were not established in this case.
The main legal principle established in the judgment is the stringent conditions for granting bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act in drug trafficking cases, emphasizing the gravity of the offence, ....
The court affirmed the strict compliance requirements of the NDPS Act in bail applications, emphasizing the need to demonstrate reasonable grounds for believing in the accused's innocence, particular....
(1) Standard prescribed for grant of bail is ‘reasonable ground to believe’ that person is not guilty of offence.(2) Given seriousness of offences punishable under NDPS Act and in order to curb menac....
The court denied bail under the NDPS Act due to the serious nature of drug trafficking charges and failure to meet statutory conditions, emphasizing public safety and legislative intent.
The court held that bail cannot be granted under the NDPS Act without satisfying the statutory requirements of demonstrating that the accused is not guilty of the offence and is unlikely to commit fu....
The stringent bail conditions under the NDPS Act and the need for substantial probable causes to grant bail.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.