NDPS RA 1207/2018
1
BA 937/2018
IN THE SPECIAL COURT FOR NARCOTIC DRUGS AND
PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES ACT, 1985, AT GR. BOMBAY
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 937 OF 2018
IN
NDPS REMAND APPLICATION NO. 1207 OF 2018
Aniket Madan Singh
Age – 21 yrs., R/A Rose, 402/403,
Regency Garden, Plot No. 10,
Sector No.6., Kharghar,
Tal.: Panvel, Dist.: Raigad.

… Applicant
/ Accused
Vs.
Union of India
Intelligence Officer,
Narcotic Control Bureau,
Mumbai Zonal Unit.

… Respondent.

Appearance:
Ld. Advocate Mr. Taraq Sayed for the applicant/ accused.
Ld. SPP Ms. Leena Shinde for the prosecution.
CORAM: H.H.THE SPECIAL JUDGE (NDPS)
SHRI. U. M. MUDHOLKAR
(C.R.NO.43)
DATED: 14th JANUARY, 2018.
ORAL ORDER
This is an application for bail filed by applicant/accused
Aniket Madan Singh on account of his arrest by the officers of NCB,
Mumbai for commission of offences punishable u/s. 8(c) r/w 20 (c),
23(c), 28 and 29 of NDPS Act, 1985.
2.

The prosecution case in nutshell reveals that the officers of
respondent received an information from the reliable source that a
NDPS RA 1207/2018
2
BA 937/2018
suspect by name Pappu Chaudhary, who is dealing with contraband
called Charas, is about to come at the given spot for delivering the same
to present applicant, Aniket and other suspect Krunal. Hence, the raid
was arranged at the spot given in the information and it is alleged that
the present applicant/accused was found having accepting 652 gm of
Charas delivered to him by the said Pappu Chaudhary. Subsequently, in
the personal search of Pappu Chaudhary remnant 2.5 Kg charas was
found and the same was seized while delivering the same to other
suspect by name Krunal Sagar. Thereafter, the applicant/accused was
placed under arrest for violation of provision of NDPS Act, 1985 as
above. After cessation of his police custody, presently he is in judicial
custody.
3.

The bail is sought on the ground that applicant/accused is
falsely implicated in the crime. It is specifically contended that the
quantity of charas allegedly seized from the possession of the present
applicant comes under the category of non­commercial quantity and
therefore, the bar of Section 37 of the NDPS Act does not get attracted.
He is permanent resident of Mumbai and residing with his family. He is
not at all concerned with the remaining charas delivered by Pappu
Chaudhary to Krunal. The applicant/accused is young person of 21
yeas old and is having no criminal antecedent. The applicant/ accused
is having good social background in the society. He is ready to abide by
the conditions imposed by this Court, while releasing him on the bail.
On these grounds it is prayed that applicant/accused be enlarged on
bail.
4.

The respondent/State contested the petition by filing reply
dated 21/12/2018. It is mainly contended that the contraband called
NDPS RA 1207/2018
3
BA 937/2018
charas of 652 gm has been seized from the possession of the present
applicant, strictly by following the provisions of law. It is specifically
contended that the total quantity of the charas found in the possession
of all the 3 accused is 5.158 Kg. which is commercial quantity and
therefore, there is a bar under Section 37 for the release of the applicant
on bail. There is enough material showing involvement of the applicant
in the transaction of commercial quantity of charas. On these grounds
it is prayed that the application be rejected.
5.

Heard Ld. Advocate Mr. Taraq Sayed for applicant & the
Ld. SPP Ms. Leena Shinde for the State, at length.
6.

It is submitted by the Ld. Defence Counsel that the quantity
of charas allegedly seized at the instance of applicant/accused is the
non­commercial quantity, as per the details reflected in the reply and
therefore, primarily the bar as contemplated u/s.37 of the NDPS Act,
does not attract. It is further contended as per the contents of the
remand application, the applicant is having permanent place of
residence and therefore, he will not abscond, if released on bail.

On
the backdrop of these submissions, he requested to release the applicant
on bail. Per contra the Ld SPP Ms. Shinde objected granting of the
application on the grounds reflected in the reply.
7.

I have carefully gone through submissions of both the sides
and record. It can be gathered from the material placed on record that
the applicant is allegedly found having in his possession 652 gm of
charas, though his vendor/ supplier was found having in his possession
commercial quantity of charas. The said commercial quantity of charas
has no
nexus with the quantity of charas allegedly found in the
NDPS RA 1207/2018
4
BA 937/2018
possession of the present applicant. It does not transpire from the
material so far placed on record that the commercial quantity of charas
was either sought by/ handed over in the possession of the present
applicant by Pappu Chaudhary. Therefore, in the considered view of
this court the quantity of charas which was allegedly found in the
individual possession of the present applicant cannot be mixed or
collectively considered with the remaining charas retained in the
custody by accused Pappu Chaudhary and subsequently handed over to
co­accused Krunal. In other words, at the most the complicity of the
present applicant can be considered to the extent of the quantity of
charas i.e. 652 gm allegedly found in his possession, which is
undoubtedly non­commercial quantity. Naturally, the bar under section
37 of the NDPS Act does not get attracted.
8.

It is equally a matter of record that since his arrest on
27/11/2018 he is in the custody and by this time the investigation in
the matter might have been almost completed, except the collection of
the CA Report from competent authority.

So also all the witnesses
except the panch witnesses are the public servants and thereby, there is
no likelihood of tampering with the evidence or otherwise. Now nothing
is to be recovered or discovered on pointing out of the applicant. The
conclusion of the trial in the present case would take sufficient long
time and it is not desirable to keep the applicant behind the bars till
then. Under these circumstances, his further detention in the judicial
custody appears to be unwarranted. To minimise the chance of his
abscondance appropriate direction to produce the documentary
evidence regarding fix place of residence can be issued. There is neither
allegation nor evidence as regards criminal antecedent to the dis­credit
of the applicant/accused. In view of forgoing discussion, I conclude that
NDPS RA 1207/2018
5
BA 937/2018
application deserves to be allowed and the interest of prosecution can
be secured by imposing following stringent conditions :
ORDER
1.

Bail Application No. 937/2018 in NDPS Remand
Application No. 12o7/2018 is hereby allowed.
2.

The applicant/accused – Aniket Madan Singh, in C.R.

No. 21/2018 registered with NCB, Mumbai be released on
bail on his executing P.R. Bond of Rs.1,00,000/­ (Rs. One
Lakh only), with one or two sureties in the like amount.
3.

The applicant/accused shall not directly or indirectly
dissuade any of the prosecution witnesses from deposing in
the Court or tamper with the prosecution evidence in any
way.
4.

Applicant/accused shall produce before his release,
the documentary proof regarding his residential address such
as AADHAR Card or PAN Card or Ration Card etc. and also
furnish his mobile number.
5.

Applicant/accused, while on bail, shall not indulge
into any criminal activity connected with the NDPS Act.
6.

Bail Application stands disposed off accordingly.

14.01.2019.
Typed on
: 14.01.2019.
Checked on : 14.01.2019.
Signed on
: 14.01.2019.

(U. M. Mudholkar)
NDPS Special Judge,
Gr. Bombay.

NDPS RA 1207/2018
6
BA 937/2018
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
:
:
15.01.2019, 04.00 pm.
Mrs. Supriya. S. Girkar
Name of the Judge (With Court HHJ Shri. U. M. Mudholkar
Room No.)
C.R. No.43
Date
of
Pronouncement
JUDGMENT/ORDER
of 14.01.2019.

JUDGMENT/ORDER
P.O. on
by 14.01.2019.

signed
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on
15.01.2019.