Shams Tabrej Mehboob Badshah Sayyed bail rejected considering the commercial quantity of contraband

On November 2, 2023, the Special Court for Narcotic Drug and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, in Greater Mumbai, rejected the bail application of Shams Tabrej Mehboob Badshah Sayyed, aged 33, in connection with Spl. LAC/C.R. No.636/2023. The case was registered at Shivaji Nagar police station, Mumbai, under sections 8(c) read with 22(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act.

The Case: Commercial Quantity of Codeine Phosphate Syrup

The prosecution alleged that on July 20, 2023, law enforcement recovered 12 bottles, each containing 100 ml of Chlorpheniramine Maleate & Codeine Phosphate syrup (PHENSIREST), from Sayyed’s “conscious possession.” The quantity of the seized contraband was deemed a commercial quantity, which significantly impacts bail considerations under the NDPS Act.

Applicant’s Arguments for Bail

Mr. Ratnakar Davre, the learned advocate representing Sayyed, presented the following arguments:

This was the first bail application filed by the applicant, with no other related applications pending in higher courts.
He disputed the claim that 10 bottles of Codeine Phosphate syrup were recovered from Sayyed’s scooter, asserting a lack of material on record to substantiate “conscious possession.” (Note: The court order explicitly states “12 bottles” were recovered from his possession, not scooter, in paragraph 3).
Sayyed was arrested on July 20, 2023, and does not have any criminal antecedents.
He is a resident of Mumbai and expressed willingness to abide by any conditions imposed by the court if granted bail.

Prosecution’s Opposition to Bail

Mr. Rajput, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor (APP), countered the bail plea with these points:

The recovery of 12 bottles of the syrup from Sayyed’s possession was confirmed.
During the investigation, Sayyed allegedly disclosed that he procured the contraband from a co-accused, establishing a “nexus/link” between them and making Section 29 of the NDPS Act (criminal conspiracy) applicable.
The recovered quantity being a commercial quantity invoked the stringent provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which places a high burden on the accused to prove their innocence.
The investigation was still ongoing, and releasing the applicant at this stage could hamper the investigation.
The applicant had failed to satisfy the conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Court’s Reasoning for Rejection

Special Judge K.P. Kshirsagar meticulously evaluated the arguments and evidence, outlining several reasons for denying bail:

Prima Facie Involvement and Nexus: The court found “prima facie involvement” of Sayyed in the crime and “positive material to indicate nexus” between him and the co-accused, thus affirming the applicability of Section 29 of the NDPS Act.
Applicability of Section 37 of NDPS Act: Given the recovery of a commercial quantity, the rigorous conditions of Section 37 were applicable. The court emphasized that Sayyed “did not demonstrate that there are grounds to believe that he is not guilty of offence alleged.”
Risk of Re-offending and Tampering: The court was “not satisfied that, the applicant/accused will not commit the similar offence again.” It also expressed concern that releasing Sayyed could lead to him tampering with prosecution witnesses or influencing them, or that he “may involve in commission of such offences.”
Prejudice to Investigation: The judge concluded that a “free, fair and full investigation” would likely be prejudiced and hampered if Sayyed were released, indicating a “necessity for the further detention… for facilitating further investigation.”
Active Role and Heinous Nature: The court observed that Sayyed appeared to have played an “active role” and that the alleged offense was of a “heinous nature,” suggesting involvement in drug peddling and a nexus with the co-accused.
Societal Interest: The court stated that releasing the applicant at this stage would likely be “prejudicial to the interest of the society at large” and that a “liberal approach in grant of bail in such kind of offences under NDPS Act is also uncalled.”

Conclusion

Based on the cumulative assessment, the Special Court determined that there were no justifiable grounds to release Shams Tabrej Mehboob Badshah Sayyed on bail at this stage, particularly considering the commercial quantity of contraband, the prima facie evidence of his involvement and nexus with a co-accused, and the ongoing investigation. The bail application, NDPS BA No.899/2023, was consequently rejected and disposed of.