NDPS RA 877/2018
1
BA 662/2018
IN THE SPECIAL COURT FOR NARCOTIC DRUGS AND
PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES ACT, 1985, AT GR. BOMBAY
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 662 OF 2018
IN
NDPS REMAND APPLICATION NO. 877 OF 2018
Mohmohd Dawood Rashid Shaikh
Age – 23 yrs., Occ.: Service,
R/A Zopda No. 1, Aman Shanti Nagar,
Kolsa Bunder, Koldepot, near Coffee Lodge
Hotel, Sewree, Mumbai.
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of Byculla Police Station
vide C.R./LAC No. 137/18,
dated 08/09/2018).
… Applicant
/ Accused
…Respondent
Appearance:
Ld. Advocate Mr. V. P. Shinde for the applicant/ accused.
Ld. APP Mr. Panjwani for the prosecution.
CORAM: H.H.THE SPECIAL JUDGE (NDPS)
SHRI. U. M. MUDHOLKAR
(C.R.NO.43)
DATED: 20th OCTOBER, 2018.
ORAL ORDER
This is an application for bail filed by applicant/accused
Mohmohd Dawood Rashid Shaikh on account of his arrest by the
officers of Byculla Police Station, Mumbai for commission of offences
punishable u/s. 8(c) r/w 22 (b) of NDPS Act, 1985.
2.
The prosecution case in nutshell reveals that the officers of
respondent received an information from the reliable source that the
NDPS RA 877/2018
2
BA 662/2018
present applicant is dealing with contraband called Mephedrone (MD)
and he is about to come at the given spot for selling the same to his
customers.
Hence, the raid was arranged at the spot given in the
information and it is alleged that the present applicant/accused was
found having in his possession 12 gm of MD.
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 MD 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 having deep roots 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 i.e. authority of Byculla Police Station was
duly served with the copy of the bail application as per the
acknowledgment dated 05/10/2018 produced on the record by the
applicant, but the reply has been filed today and the same is taken on
record.
The Ld. APP contested the petition by filing reply on the
application itself. It is mainly contended that the applicant/accused had
procured drug for sale purpose, hence the offence is against the society
and does not deserve the bail. On these grounds it is prayed that the
application be rejected.
NDPS RA 877/2018
5.
3
BA 662/2018
Heard Ld. Advocate Mr. Shinde for applicant & the Ld. APP
Mr. Panjwani for the State, at length.
6.
It is submitted by the Ld. Defence Counsel that the quantity
of MD allegedly seized at the instance of applicant/accused is the non
commercial quantity, as per the details reflected in the remand papers
as well as 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 APP Mr. Panjwani 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 12 gm of MD
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
08/09/2018 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. 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
NDPS RA 877/2018
4
BA 662/2018
custody appears to be unwarranted. Applicant appears to have fixed
place of residence as reflected in the remand application and as such
there is minimal chance of his abscondance. There is neither allegation
nor record regarding criminal antecedents to the discredit of the
applicant.
In view of forgoing discussion, I conclude that application
deserves to be allowed and the interest of prosecution can be secured by
imposing following stringent conditions :
ORDER
1.
Bail
Application
No.
662/2018
in
NDPS
Remand
Application No. 877/2018 is hereby allowed.
2.
The applicant/accused – Mohmohd Dawood Rashid Shaikh,
in C.R./LAC No.137/2018 registered with Byculla Police Station,
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 shall produce documentary evidence such as
AADHAR card, PAN card or ration card before his release.
4.
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.
5.
Bail Application stands disposed off accordingly.
20.10.2018.
Typed on
: 20.10.2018.
Checked on : 20.10.2018.
Signed on
: 20.10.2018.
(U. M. Mudholkar)
NDPS Special Judge,
Gr. Bombay.
NDPS RA 877/2018
5
BA 662/2018
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
:
:
24.10.2018, 12.30 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 20.10.2018.
JUDGMENT/ORDER
P.O. on
by 20.10.2018.
signed
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on
24.10.2018.