IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL -

AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 5781 of 2026 ==========================================================

AMIN @ JAVID HANIF IBRAHIM MALEK Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

ADILHUSHAIN M SAIYED(9723) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR UTKARSH SHARMA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY Date : 13/03/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. The Applicant has filed this Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for enlarging the Applicant on Regular Bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11199012240250 of 2024 registered with City 'B' Division, Bharuch Police Station, Bharuch for the offences punishable under Sections 8(C), 20(a)(i), 22(c), 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

2. Heard learned Advocate for the Applicant and learned APP for the Respondent – State.

3. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the applicant has been arrested in connection with the present offence on 22.04.2024 and since then he is in custody. The applicant had earlier preferred Criminal Misc. Application No. 3307 of 2025, which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 25.03.2025. However, thereafter there is no progress in the trial. He further submitted that the Apex Court in a similar case, when there was no progress in trial has considered the case of respective accused for the grant of bail. He therefore submitted that the applicant should also be released on bail considering the fact that there is no progress in the trial. Learned Advocate for the Applicant has also submitted that the Applicant has good reputation in the society and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in jail for indefinite period. It is further contended that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions that may be imposed by this Court if released on bail.

4. Per contra, learned APP has opposed the present application for grant of regular bail contending that the applicant had earlier preferred Criminal Misc. Application No. 3307 of 2025, which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 25.03.2025, while dismissing the said application this Court has made following observations:-

"5. Heard learned Advocates for the parties and perused the record. The Police Authorities had received some secret information that the present Applicant had kept the contraband substance of Mephedrone in his house for the purpose of sale. On the basis of the said secret information, a raid was carried out by the Police Authorities and the Applicant was found present in the house and upon search of the house being carried out, the contraband substance of Mephedrone worth 130 Grams and Ganja worth 238 Grams was found from the said house. As admitted by the learned Advocate appearing for the Applicant, the Applicant was present in the house in the capacity of a tenant. Thus, the possession of the present Applicant over the said substance was conscious. Moreover, the quantity of contraband substance involved in the present offence is a commercial quantity and therefore the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would come into play. The record also indicates that the Applicant has another antecedents for the offence punishable under the NDPS Act."

5. Learned APP has therefore submitted that looking to the nature of offence, this Court may not exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant and the Application may be dismissed.

6. Heard learned Advocates for the parties and perused the record. The investigation is over and charge sheet is filed. So far as the aspect of delay in trial is concerned, as per the latest judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Vigin K. Varghese reported in 2025 INSC 1316, the delay in trial cannot be the ground for