Mumbai, December 7, 2018 – In a significant development, the Special Judge for NDPS Cases at Greater Mumbai, M. S. Mungale, today granted bail to Adnan @ Addu Shoukat Ali Sayyed Sayyed, 38, who was implicated in a case involving the alleged sale of contraband tablets. The order, issued on December 6, 2018, allows Sayyed to be released on bail upon executing a personal recognizance (P.R.) bond of Rs. 15,000/-.

Sayyed, a resident of Kurla (West), Mumbai, had filed a bail application (NDPS Bail Application No. 874 of 2018) under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, asserting his innocence and claiming false implication by the police. His primary contention was that no contraband was recovered directly from his possession, and his involvement was based solely on information allegedly provided by Accused No. 1 in the case.

The case, registered as C.R. No. 85/18 by V. B. Nagar Police Station on September 28, 2018, falls under NDPS Remand Application No. 1164 of 2018 and NDPS SPL. L.A.C. No. 85 of 2018.

During the proceedings, the Investigating Officer, in a reply dated December 3, 2018, contested the bail application. The officer argued that Adnan Sayyed (Accused No. 2) and Accused No. 1 were allegedly engaged in a conspiracy to sell contraband tablets, specifically NITRAVET-10 and ALKO-1. The prosecution, represented by Learned Additional Public Prosecutor (A.P.P.) Mr. B. G. Rajput, maintained this stance.

However, a crucial point emerged during the arguments. The learned A.P.P. orally reported to the court that while a charge-sheet had been filed against Accused No. 1, there was no direct or indirect evidence against Adnan Sayyed, apart from the alleged statement given by Accused No. 1. This admission seemingly weakened the prosecution’s case against Sayyed regarding his direct involvement in possessing contraband.

Mr. Gorakh Liman, the learned Advocate representing the applicant/accused, strongly argued for his client’s release, reiterating that the lack of direct recovery and reliance solely on a co-accused’s statement indicated a weak case for continued detention.

After hearing arguments from both sides, Special Judge M. S. Mungale concluded that in the absence of any other substantive evidence linking Adnan Sayyed directly to the possession of contraband, bail was warranted. The court emphasized that the alleged statement of Accused No. 1 alone was insufficient to deny bail.

In addition to the bail bond, the court has stipulated that Adnan Sayyed “shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.”

The order was dictated and transcribed on December 6, 2018, and signed on the same day by His Honour the Special Judge M. S. Mungale. The certified copy of the judgment/order was uploaded on December 7, 2018, at 5:30 p.m.

This decision highlights the judiciary’s adherence to the principle that an accused should not be kept in custody solely on the basis of uncorroborated statements from co-accused, especially when there is no other direct evidence of their involvement in the alleged crime. The case will now proceed with Adnan Sayyed out on bail, pending further legal developments.