Mumbai, Maharashtra – November 2, 2023 – The Special Judge for N.D.P.S. Cases at Greater Mumbai, Shri R. R. Bhagwat (C.R.44), has granted bail to Vijay Ramesh Indrekar (53), who was arrested on August 25, 2023, in connection with C.R. No. 431/2023 registered at Andheri Police Station. Indrekar was accused of offenses punishable under sections 8(c) read with 20(b) & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985.

Case Background:

According to the prosecution, on August 24, 2023, an Andheri Police Station team was on patrolling duty when, at about 00:10 hrs on August 25, 2023, they observed one person and four women acting suspiciously with a white gunny bag in front of Kessar Bai Chawl, Telli Galli cross lane, Andheri. During questioning, they gave evasive answers. Panchas were called, and a search of the bag, which contained seven packets wrapped with brown cello tape and loose ganja, was conducted. This resulted in the recovery of a total of 20 kgs. 400 gms. of Ganja. Indrekar (Accused No. 1) was arrested on the spot. Due to the late hour, the four women (Accused Nos. 2 to 5) were directed to attend the police station later and were subsequently arrested on August 25, 2023.

Further investigation led to the arrest of Shivlinga Dhangar (supplier) on August 28, 2023, based on the interrogation of Accused No. 3, Gauri Nevlekar. Shivlinga then implicated Rajkumari Thakur as the main supplier, who was arrested on August 30, 2023, and admitted to supplying Ganja to Shivlinga for months.

Arguments for Bail:

Ms. Zehra Charaniya, the learned advocate for Vijay Ramesh Indrekar, sought bail on several grounds:

• Allegations of false implication.
• The FIR did not specify who possessed the gunny bag containing the contraband.
• The mixing of Ganja from seven packets with loose Ganja for weighing was improper.
• The search of the applicant and the gunny bag was conducted by raiding party members who were allegedly not empowered under the NDPS Act.
• No seizure panchanama was explicitly mentioned in the FIR as prepared on the date of the incident.
• Indrekar is a permanent resident of Mumbai.
• He is entitled to bail on the ground of parity, as Accused Nos. 3 to 7 (the four women and two suppliers) had already been granted bail.
• While Indrekar has a prior prohibition case and Accused No. 2 has an antecedent of narcotic drug consumption, there was no record of conviction.

Prosecution’s Opposition:

Mr. Shankar Erande, the learned APP for the State, opposed the bail, arguing that:

• Accused Nos. 1 to 5 were found with the gunny bag during patrolling duty, and Section 50 of the NDPS Act procedures were followed (though he contended Section 50 was not applicable as seizure was from a bag, not a person).
• The seized 20 kgs. 400 gms. of Ganja is a commercial quantity, attracting the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
• A wanted accused, “Akka,” is yet to be arrested.
• Indrekar allegedly supplied contraband to Gauri, and various accused (Gauri, Shivlinga, Barkha, Ragini, Sarika) are interconnected, indicating a larger network.
• The offense is serious, and Accused Nos. 1 and 2 are “habitual offenders.”

Court’s Reasoning and Decision:

Special Judge R. R. Bhagwat, upon perusal of the record and hearing arguments, found several issues with the prosecution’s case and procedures:

• Possession Ambiguity: The FIR did not explicitly state whose possession the gunny bag containing the contraband was found in, only that “one person along with four women” were carrying it.
• Empowered Officer Issue: The court noted that while the police felt it necessary to follow NDPS procedures, the search of the gunny bag was conducted by HC Bhosale and HC Bhoite, and WPC Ambekar observed the contents. The court specifically stated that these officers “are not empowered officers within meaning of sec. 42(1) of the NDPS Act, vitiating the procedure of search and seizure.”
• Homogeneous Mixture Irregularity: The court observed that a “homogeneous mixture” of the seized contraband was prepared without satisfying the requirements of Rule 10 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Seizure, Storage, Sampling and Disposal) Rules, 2022. This rule mandates identical size and weight for packages and containers when preparing such mixtures.
• Applicability of Citations: The court found that the citations relied upon by the applicant (likely referring to the previous bail orders cited by Ms. Charaniya, though not explicitly named in the reasoning part for this specific order, but implied from the earlier order details) regarding searches by unempowered officers and personal searches of female accused were applicable to the present case.

Based on these procedural defects, the court concluded that the accused had “brought on record sufficient material to make court to believe that they are not guilty of the offence,” thereby lifting the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

• Criminal Antecedents: While acknowledging Indrekar’s criminal antecedent in a prohibition case, the court noted that “there is no record to show that the applicant is not convicted.”
• Parity: Since other co-accused had already been released on bail, the present applicant was deemed “entitled to bail on the ground of parity.”
• Presence Assurance: As Indrekar is a Mumbai resident, his presence can be secured with conditions.

The court decided to impose stringent conditions to ensure cooperation with the remaining investigation.

Bail Granted with Conditions:

The court allowed Bail Application No. 854/2023, directing Vijay Ramesh Indrekar to be released on a provisional cash bail of Rs. 50,000/- for the next four weeks, and upon executing a P. R. Bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount thereafter, subject to the following conditions:

• Indrekar shall attend Andheri Police Station every Monday between 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. until the filing of the charge-sheet for investigation purposes.
• He and his sureties shall provide their mobile numbers and correct residential addresses, along with names and details of two relatives.
• He shall produce proof of identity and residence at the time of executing the Bail Bonds.
• He shall not tamper with prosecution witnesses/evidence and cooperate in the early disposal of the trial.
• He shall not commit similar offenses while on bail.

The application was disposed of accordingly.

---