1
BA 816/18 (RA 1107/18)
IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL JUDGE FOR N.D.P.S CASES FOR
GREATER BOMBAY AT MUMBAI
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.816/2018
(CNR No. MHCC02­ 014340­2018)
IN
N.D.P.S. R.A. 1107/2018
Smt. Mumbadevi Ayyav Devendra
..Applicant/Accused
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra,
(at the instance of Pydhonie
police station, C.R. No.235/18)
…Respondents
Appearances:­
Ld. Advocate Mr.V.P. Shinde for applicant/accused.
Ld. APP Mr. P.S Tawade for Respondent/State.
Coram :H.H.J The Special Judge (NDPS)
Shri. V.V. Vidwans (CR No.42).
Date : 15.11.2018.
ORAL ORDER
1.

This is an application for grant of regular bail filed on
behalf of the accused u/s. 439 of Cr.P.C. Say of I.O and Ld. APP for the
State was called and it is submitted on record vide Exh.2. Seen and
considered the say.
2.

I have heard Ld. Adv. Mr. V.P. Shinde for the accused and
Ld. APP Mr Tawade for the State.
3.

It is submitted on behalf of the accused that, on 8.11.2018,
accused was arrested for allegedly committing offences punishable
under NDPS Act, 1985 in a raid conducted on receiving information and
Pydhonie police have recovered 8 grams of Heroin from the possession
2
of the accused.

BA 816/18 (RA 1107/18)
It is submitted that, the seized quantity of the
contraband Heroin i.e. 8 grams is just above small quantity, but not a
commercial quantity. Therefore, stringent provisions of Sec.37 of NDPS
Act are not attracted. The accused is permanent resident of Mumbai.
Ld. Counsel for the accused has submitted on record details of her
residential address along with photocopy of Adhar Card vide Exh.3.
Seen and considered the same.
4.

Ld. Counsel for the accused has submitted that, that the
accused is a woman and having roots in society. She is not likely to
abscond, therefore entitled to be released on bail subject to conditions.
Regarding pendency of criminal cases against the accused, Ld. Counsel
for accused submitted that, C.R.Nos. 243/14 and 11/15 are under
NDPS Act. It was further submitted that, mere pendency of criminal
cases cannot be sufficient to hold that the accused is a habitual
offender. In this regard Ld. Counsel has placed reliance on the decisions
of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in following cases:­
1.

Vinod Kalyanji Bhagat V/s. Inspector of Customs
and another (Cri. Application No. 4410 of 2002)
decided on 23rd January, 2003. (Bombay High
Court)
2.

Raosaheb Patole V/s. The State of Maharashtra
(Cri. Bail Application No. 373 of 2011) decided on
24th March, 2011. (Bombay High Court)
3.

Janu @ Billa Malappa Pawar V/s. State of
Maharashtra (2006 ALL MR (Cri) 2577)
4.

Smt. Najma Abdul Shaikh V/s. The State of
Maharashtra (Cri. Bail Application No. 1311 of
2012) decided on October 23, 2012) (Bombay
High Court).

3
5.

BA 816/18 (RA 1107/18)
I have gone through the above authorities and taken into
consideration ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in
those cases.
6.

Ld. APP for the State has strongly opposed the bail
application and has relied on the say and submitted that, the accused
has been arrested by police red­handed while possessing 8 grams of
heroin. She is a habitual offender and two criminal cases bearing C.R.
No. 243/14 and 11/15 are pending against her. She is changing her
name and identity and likely to abscond, if released on bail.
Investigation is still in progress. Therefore, application is liable to be
rejected.
7.

I have gone through the bail application and perused
remand papers. I have also considered oral submissions made by Ld.
Counsels for both sides and ratio of the various authorities of Hon’ble
High Court submitted and relied upon by Ld. Counsel for the accused. It
is clear from the material on record that, the quantity of the seized
contraband i.e. 8 grams heroin is not commercial quantity, which is just
above small quantity. The accused is permanent resident of Mumbai as
per her Adhar Card. She is a woman. Considering the ratio of decisions
of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, mere pendency of the cases against
the accused cannot be sufficient ground to treat her habitual offender
and bail cannot be denied simply on that ground. Under the above
circumstances, I am of the opinion that, stringent provisions of Sec.37
of NDPS Act are not applicable and this Court can grant bail to the
accused in exercise of its discretionary jurisdiction subject to conditions.
Hence, I proceed to pass following order:­
4
BA 816/18 (RA 1107/18)
ORDER
1.

Bail Application No.816/2018 is hereby allowed.

2.

Accused/ applicant Smt. Mumbadevi Ayyav
Devendra shall be released on her executing
P.R.Bond of Rs.25,000/­ (Rs. Twenty Five
Thousand Only) with one or two local sureties to
the above extent.

3.

The applicant/accused to attend the I.O at
Pydhonie police station for the purpose of
investigation once in a fortnight on 1st and third
Saturday of the month between 11.00 am to
2.00 pm till filing of the charge­sheet. If I.O is
absent, then she should give attendance to the
PSO Incharge.

4.

The applicant/ accused shall not tamper with
prosecution witnesses/evidence in any manner
and co­operate in the investigation.

5.

The applicant/accused shall furnish her cell/
landline number and also of his two nearest
relatives or her two friends, preferably residing
in Mumbai.

6.

The applicant/accused shall produce the proof of
her identity and proof of residence at Mumbai at
the time of executing the bail bond.

5
7.

BA 816/18 (RA 1107/18)
The applicant/accused shall not commit similar
offence while on bail.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions
by
the
applicant/accused,
it
would
entail
cancellation of bail.
Bail Appln. No.816/18 stands disposed of
accordingly.

Date:­ 15.11.2018
Dictated on: 15.11.2018
Transcribed on: 16.11.2018
HHJ signed on: 17.11.2018
(V.V. Vidwans)
N.D.P.S Special Judge
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Bombay (CR 42).

“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ ORDER.
UPLOADED ON : 17.11.2018
TIME: 4.50 pm
(NITIN V. UBALE)
SELECTION GR. STENOGRAPHER.

Name of the judge (with Court Room No.)

Shri V.V.Vidwans, Spl. Judge & Addl. Sessions
Judge (C.R. 42)
Date of pronouncement of Judgment/ Order
15.11.18
Judgment/ order signed by P.O on
17.11.18
Judgment/ order uploaded on
17.11.18