ORDER :

SANJEEV J.THAKER, J.

1. By way of the present application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’), the applicant has prayed for anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in connection with the FIR being 11191011250221 of 2025 registered before the DCB Police Station, Ahmedabad City for the offences punishable under Sections 8(C), 22(C) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, ‘the NDPS Act’). 2. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent – State.

3. Learned advocate for the applicant has argued that the allegations levelled against the present applicant are that during the raid, the police party had asked about the drugs and from whom and from where they had brought the drugs, and at that time, both the accused informed that they wanted to do the business; and that they had named the present applicant and one Alpesh Patel to have supplied the said contraband substance to Piyush Somabhai Patel (accused No.1) and Sachinsinh Prafulsinh Puvar (accused No.2); and that just because the applicant is a friend of accused No.1 and the applicant is not the beneficiary of single money from such contraband substance and the contraband was lying with accused Nos.1 and 2 and the only role of the applicant was that the applicant had introduced accused Nos.1 and 2 to one Alpesh Patel (accused No.4), the applicant is impleaded as accused; and that the contraband has not been recovered from the applicant and the only role of the applicant was that he contacted accused Nos.1 and 2 with accused No.4, therefore, the applicant is shown as accused in the impugned FIR. It is submitted that the present applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR; and that the allegations stated in the FIR do not disclose a clear, definite or credible factual foundation to infer against the present applicant. It is submitted that this application may be allowed.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed this application. It is submitted that the applicant is directly involved in the offence in question; and that the investigation is at the preliminary stage and as per the investigation, accused Nos.1 and 2 were found with contraband substance and in the co-accused have specifically stated that accused No.1 – Piyush Somabhai Patel had contacted the present applicant for purchase of the contraband and therefore, the contraband substance was given by Alpesh Patel (accused No.4) and the amount was to be given as per the instructions of the present applicant. It is submitted that as the applicant is directly involved in the commission of offence in question, custodial interrogation is necessary and the presence of the applicant is required for further investigation. It is submitted that the present application is required to be rejected.

5.1 Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties and having gone through the material produced on record, including the police papers, this Court finds that prosecution has ceased the contraband and the investigation is going on; and the applicant has introduced the accused to Alpesh Patel (accused No.4) for procurement of the contraband and the money was to be received by the applicant; and that the investigation is at the stage to prove that the contraband substance was supplied by the applicant and Alpesh Patel and the co-accused i.e. accused No.1 had given a statement that the same was supplied by Alpesh Patel (accused No.4) through the present applicant and the amount was to be handed over to the applicant; and that the statement given by the co-accused is helpful to the investigating agency for the purpose of ascertaining that the investigation is proceeding in right direction or not; and that during the investigation of an offence, the statement of the co-accused would be material and provide a lead in the inv