[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Nazim Ali Ashfaq Ali @ Nazimali ... vs State Of Maharashtra on 18 March, 2026
2026:BHC-AS:13480 903 BA-4474-2025
Navnath Waghmare (P.A)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4474 OF 2025
Nazim Ali Ashfaq Ali @ Nazimali Ashfaqali ...Applicant
Sayyed
Versus
State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent
Mr. Gopal J. Pandey i/b Rahul Pandey for the Applicant.
Ms. Veera Shinde APP for the State
CORAM: R. M. JOSHI, J.
RESERVED ON : 16th MARCH, 2026
JUDGMENT:
- PRONOUNCED ON 18th MARCH, 2026
1. This is an Application filed under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for seeking bail in
connection with C.R. No. 60 of 2025 registered with Nallasopara
Police station for the offence punishable under sections 22(c) r/w
8(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act.
2. It is a case of prosecution that on 21.02.2025, during
patrolling duty, officers of Anti Narcotic Cell, Mira Bhayander,
Vasai, Virar Commissionerate found one auto rickshaw standing
suspiciously at about 11:35 p.m., it's seen that one Nigerian lady
was sitting in the auto rickshaw. As both i.e. lady and auto
rickshaw driver were found suspicions, they were nabbed. The said
903 BA-4474-2025
lady was having black-colour plastic bag with her. On inquiry,
evasive answers were given. As suspicion was raised by the police
officer and hence panchas were called after giving written
intimation to said lady before the panchas, the bag with the lady
was searched. 506.2 grams Mephedrone (MD) was recovered from
her bag. During the body search of auto rikshaw driver, he was
found carrying 14.6 grams Mephedrone (MD). They were arrested
in connection with this crime. After completion of the investigation
chargesheet is filed.
3. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that herein this
case rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply for the
reason that no commercial quantity of contraband has been seized
at the instance of the applicant. It is further argued that there are
inconsistencies in the statements made in the panchnama with
regard to the quantity of contraband, as compared to the inventory
panchanama. It is further contended that after the delay of about 6
days, the seized contraband was produced before the Magistrate
for inventory panchanama. It is submitted that having regard to
the facts of the case and material collected during the
investigation, doubt is created with regard to recovery of
contraband from the person of the accused and hence it is a fit case
to for his enlargement on bail.
4. Learned APP opposed the application on the ground that
there is evidence on record to connect present applicant with the
co-accused from whom over 500 Grams of (MD) was recovered. It
903 BA-4474-2025
is submitted that the applicant is not unknown auto rickshaw
driver who has coincidentally took the accused as a passenger.
However, there is evidence on record to show the contact between
the applicant and co-accused so also the main accused who used to
supply the contraband from foreign country. It is submitted that
having regard to nature of offence and total recovery done at the
instance of both accused persons, which is huge quantity of
contraband, this is not a fit case for the grant of bail. To support
the said submission she placed reliance on Union of India thr.
Narcotics Control Bureau Lucknow Vs. MD. Nawaz Khan 2021 -10
SCC 100. in rejoinder Learned counsel for the applicant submits
that in the cited judgment, it was a case of seizure of contraband
from the vehicle and therefore the occupants of the vehicle were
held to be liable for the said recovery. It is submission that here in
this case there is no recovery from the auto rickshaw as said
judgment has no application to the present case.
5. Prima-facie, perusal of the record indicate that this is a case
wherein there was no previous information received in respect of
contraband being carried by any person. Applicant and co-accused
were found in suspicion condition in a auto rickshaw and therefore
they were searched. There is material on record to indicate prior
to personal search of the applicant due to notice under Section 50
was given to him further in presence of panch witnesses (MD) of
14.06 grams was seized. The said contraband was placed before
the Magistrate for investory Panchanama and samples of
contraband were sent to CA for its examination. There is CA report
903 BA-4474-2025
on record confirming the seized articles to be MD. Thus there is
prima-facie evidence on record to show the necessary compliance
being done and involvement of the applicant in the crime could be
seen.
6. Now the question arises as to whether it could be
considered at this stage that applicant had possible knowledge of
about 500 plus grams of MD being carried by the co-accused. In
the instant case there is evidence on record to indicate that the
applicant and co-accused were in regular contact with the supplies
of contraband. Thus it cannot be said that this is a case wherein
the coincidentally co-accused occupied auto rickshaw driven by the
applicant. As such case recovery of the contraband article even
from co-accused connects him with the crime. Thus there is prima-
facie material on record to indicate that huge quantity of MD was
seized from both accused. The rigor of Section 37 of the Act has
application to this case. Since this Court does not find apparently
that accused has not committed crime, this is not a fit case of grant
of bail.
7. Consequently, application stands dismissed.
(R. M. JOSHI, J.)
{
