JUDGMENT :

A.Y. KOGJE, J.

Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of rule on behalf of respondent-State. Learned advocate Mr. Kshitij Amin waives service of rule on behalf of respondent-NIA. The appeal is filed by the appellant for following reliefs:-

1. The appeal is filed by the appellant under Section 21 of the National Investigation Act, 2008 for the offences punishable under Sections 120B of IPC, under Sections 8(c), 21(c), 25, 27A, and 29 of the NPDS Act and under Sections 17 and 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act for following reliefs:-

(A) HON’BLE COURT be pleased to allow this application and be further pleased to release the appellant on bail in connection with FIR No.1 of 2018 registered with ATS Police Station, Ahmedabad re-registered as RC-26/2020/NIA/DLI with NIA Branch Office, Mumbai, on suitable terms and conditions;

2. Learned Advocate for the appellant has submitted that the appellant has been arrested on 20.10.2018 in connection with FIR No. 1 of 2018 registered with ATS Police Station, Ahmedabad reregistered as RC-26/2020/NIA/DLI with NIA Branch Office, Mumbai for offences punishable u/s. 120B of IPC, section 8(c), 21(c), 25, 27A, 29 of NDPS Act and sections 17 and 18 of Unlawful Activities Prevention act.

2.1 Learned Advocate for the appellant has submitted that the appellant came to be arrested in connection with the above offence. Thereafter, the appellant had approached the court of learned Special Judge (NIA), Ahmedabad by way of NIA Criminal Misc. Application No. 34 of 2023 for regular bail. The respondent no.2 filed affidavit in reply to the application filed by the appellant. It is submitted that learned Special Judge (NIA), Ahmedabad rejected the said application vide order dated 14.09.2023.

2.2 Learned Advocate for the appellant has submitted that there is no recovery or discovery of any narcotic drug from the present appellant and the appellant has not played any role in possession or transportation of any drug much less the alleged movement of drugs. It is further submitted that the appellant was not in “conscious possession” or “constructive possession” of any contraband material. It is further submitted that the investigating agency has failed to establish any link between the appellant and the co-accused from whom the alleged contraband was recovered.

2.3 Learned Advocate for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is a trader working under the name and style of M/s Reyaz & Company having GST registration No. 01CGSPM3262J1Z8 with an address of principal place of business at Magam, Budgam, Jammu and Kashmir. The appellant deals in fruit, vegetables, grains, carpet and shawls.

2.4 Learned Advocate for the appellant has submitted that the appellant supplied carpets to Raja Rani Fulkari (Raja Rani Collection Amritsar) on the Guarantee/assurance of Simranjit Singh WA-2 and in return of carpet Raja Rani Fulkari handed over cheques of Punjab National Bank and Yes Bank of various dates. However, all the cheques returned with remarks fund insufficient.

2.5 Learned Advocate for the appellant has submitted that as all the cheques handed over to the appellant were returned with remarks fund insufficient, appellant contacted WA-2 Simranjit Singh, who had brokered the deal between the parties. The said contact was made only with a view to demand payment of pending/bounced cheques and called more than 25 times. Despite the said situation being brought to the notice of the investigating agency, the investigating agency has thought it fit use the said call details for alleged criminal activities.

2.6 Learned Advocate for the appellant has submitted that the only piece of evidence against the appellant is the Test Identification Parade, wherein the witness-Ghanshyambhai Muljibhai Patel identified the appellant on 29.10.2018. However, the statement of said witness- Ghanshyambhai Muljibhai Patel recorded on 20.10.2018 states that the appellant was brought before him along with the poli