NDPS BA No.1094/2023
..1..

in Spl. Case No.300/2024
MHCC020191212023
Presented on
: 21-12-2023
Registered on : 21-12-2023
Decided on
: 29-02-2024
Duration
: 02 M, 08 Days
IN THE SPECIAL COURT FOR NARCOTIC DRUG AND
PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES ACT, 1985, AT GR. BOMBAY
NDPS BAIL APPLICATION NO.1094 OF 2023
IN
SPECIAL CASE NO. 300 OF 2024
Sahil Ramjanali Khan
Aged about : 27 years, Occ: R/at : Room No.102, Building No.10,
H.D.L. Building, Near Kohinoor Hospital,
Kurla (West), Mumbai.

)
)
)
)
) ..Applicant/Accused No.1
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of DCB-CID Unit-6,
Mumbai,
vide
C.R.
No.56/2023)
(Navghar police station, Mumbai vide
C.R. No.172/2023).

)
)
)
)
) .. Respondent/Prosecutor
Appearance :
Ld. Adv. Mr. Mandar Goswami, for the applicant/accused.
Ld. APP Mr. P.J. Tarange, for the respondent/prosecution.

NDPS BA No.1094/2023
..2..

in Spl. Case No.300/2024
CORAM : K.P. KSHIRSAGAR
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE (C.R.43)
DATE
: 29/02/2024
ORAL ORDER
This is an application taken out by applicant/accused No.1
Sahil Ramjanali Khan under section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure
for enlarging him on bail in C.R. No.56/2023 registered at DCB-CID
Unit-6, Mumbai (C.R. No.172/2023 registered with Navghar police
station, Mumbai) (now Special Case No.300/2024) for the offences
punishable under section 420, 465, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal
Code (here-in-after referred as “IPC”) and for the offences punishable
under section 8(c) r/w section 22(c) section 20 and section 29 of
Narcotic Drug and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter
referred as “NDPS Act”).
2.

Perused the application, documents filed therewith, say of
the learned APP and record of Special Case No.300/2024. Heard,
arguments advanced by learned Advocate for applicant/accused and
learned APP.
3.

Learned Advocate for applicant/accused No.1 argued that,
this is the first bail application taken out by the applicant/accused and
no other bail application of the applicant/accused is pending in any
higher Court in respect of the above crime or rejected by Higher court.
Learned Advocate for applicant/accused No.1 argued that, as per
prosecution case, 62 gram Ketamine is recovered from the possession of
the applicant/accused No.1. The quantity of contraband recovered from
NDPS BA No.1094/2023
..3..

in Spl. Case No.300/2024
the possession of the applicant/accused No.1 is of intermediate quantity.
Therefore, rigours under section 37 of the NDPS Act are applicable to
the case of the applicant/accused. Applicant/accused No.1 and coaccused Nos.2 to 6 were found together and intermediate quantity of
contraband is only recovered from them. The applicant/accused No.1
has no concern with the other co-accused Nos.7 to 11 and with the
contraband recovered from the possession of the co-accused No.8.
There is no positive material on record to indicate any nexus between
applicant/accused and the other co-accused. The applicant/accused was
not found together with co-accused Nos.7, 8 and 9. Therefore, provision
of section 29 of the NDPS Act is not applicable to the case of the
applicant/accused. Now the investigation is completed and chargesheet/final report is already filed. Applicant/accused is not having any
criminal antecedents. The applicant/accused is resident of Mumbai and
he is ready to abide all terms and conditions which the court may
impose. Therefore, Ld. Advocate for the applicant/accused prayed that,
applicant/accused be released on bail.
Ld. Advocate for the applicant/accused kept his reliance on
the following citations :
No.1
Sunil Shishupal Nayak Vs. The State of
Maharashtra,
in
Bail
Application
No.1450/2023, dated 23/10/2023 of
Hon’ble Bombay High Court.

No.2
Sagar Nana Borkar Vs. The State of
Maharashtra, in Criminal Bail Application
No.3636/2022, dated 15.09.2023 of Hon’ble
Bombay High Court.

No.3
Saida Yusuf Shaikh V/s. The State of
Maharashtra
in
Bail
Application
NDPS BA No.1094/2023
..4..

in Spl. Case No.300/2024
No.2854/2021, order dated 13.07.2022 of
Hon’ble Bombay High Court.
No.4
Amarsingh Ramjibhai Barot Vs. State of Gujarat,
in Appeal (Cri.) No.1218/2005, dated
19/09/2005 of Hon’ble Apex Court.

No.5
Smt. Rashida Iqbal Khan V.s State of
Maharashtra,
in
Criminal
Application
No.2177/2006, dated 21.06.2006 of Hon’ble
Bombay High Court.

Court has gone through the observations made therein.
4.
gram
On the other hand, Ld. APP argued that, on 16.08.2023, 62
Ketamine
was
recovered
from
the
possession
of
the
applicant/accused No.1 Sahil Ramzan Ali Khan @ Massa, 54 gram
Ketamine was recovered from the co-accused No.2 Mohammad Azmal
Qasam Shaikh, 31 grams Charas was recovered from the possession of
the co-accused No.3 Shamshuddin Niazuddin Shah, 20 grams Ketamine
was recovered from the possession of the co-accused No.4 Imran Aslam
Pathan, 14 grams Ketamine was recovered from the possession of the
co-accused No.5 Mohammad Taufiq Shaukat Ali Mansoori and 18 grams
Ketamine was recovered from the possession of the co-accused No.6
Mohammad Ismail Salim Siddhiqe who were found together in one Car.
Moreover, 58 grams Ketamine was recovered from the possession of the
co-accused No.7 Sarfaraz Shabir Ali Khan @ Golden Bhura and 69.73
gram Ketamine and 54.50 gram Mephedrone (MD) was recovered from
the possession of the co-accused No.8 Raees Amin Qureshi and 14
grams Charas was recovered from the possession of co-accused No.9
Priyanka Ashok Karkaur, who were sitting in the car bearing
Registration No.MH-04-GZ-2772. Moreover, 6.16 gram Mephedrone
NDPS BA No.1094/2023
..5..

in Spl. Case No.300/2024
(MD) is recovered from the co-accused No.11 Saeed Sajjad Shaikh.
Specific information about applicant/accused was received. All the
accused Nos.1 to 6 were found in one car and accused Nos.7 to 11 were
found in one car. Cumulative quantity of contraband recovered in the
crime is commercial. Therefore, rigours of section 37 of the NDPS Act
are attracted. Information about accused Nos.1 to 8 was received and
information
was
received
in
respect
of
the
two
vehicles.

Applicant/accused No.1 after his interception had disclosed about the
car wherein accused Nos.7 to 9 were coming. It prima facie shows that,
co-accused No.6 is having knowledge about the co-accused and as they
were traveling in private car, they were having knowledge about
possession of the contraband by the co-accused. Recovery is from all
accused Nos.1 to 9. Therefore, their possession of the contraband
appears to be conscious. The extract of the CDR produced on record
also indicates nexus between applicant/accused and co-accused.
Therefore, there is positive material on record to indicate the nexus
between applicant/accused and co-accused and to show that,
applicant/accused
and
co-accused
had
hatched
conspiracy.

Applicant/accused is a drug peddler and there is positive material to
show his involvement and nexus with the co-accused. Therefore,
provision of section 29 of the NDPS Act is applicable to the case of the
applicant/accused. As such, rigours of section of 37 of the NDPS are
also applicable to the case of applicant/accused and the co-accused. It
appears that, the huge property purchased from the business of the
trafficking
is
seized.

Applicant/accused
has
not
demonstrated
reasonable grounds to believe that, he is not guilty of the offence
alleged to have been committed by him. Therefore, Ld. APP submitted
that application be rejected.

NDPS BA No.1094/2023
..6..

in Spl. Case No.300/2024
Ld. APP kept his reliance on the following citations.

No.1
Mehboob Ali and Anr., Vs. State of
Rajasthan, Criminal Appeal No.808 with
1088/2010, dated 27.10.2015 of Hon’ble
Apex Cour.

No.2
Union of India through NCB, Lucknow Vs.
Mohd. Nawaz Khan, in Criminal Appeal
No.1043/2021, dated 22.09.2021 of
Hon’ble Apex Court.

No.3
Narcotics Control Bureau Vs. Mohit
Aggarwal, Criminal Appeal Nos.11011102/2022 (Arising out of Petition for
Special Leave to Appeal (Cri.) No(s).612829/2021), dated 19/07/2022 of Hon’ble
Apex Court.

No.4
Neelam Devi Vs. State of U.P. in Criminal
Misc. Bail Application No.29318/2022.

Court has gone through the observations made therein.
5.

From
the
matter
on
record
it
appears
that,
applicant/accused is alleged to have committed offence punishable
under section 8(c) r/w section 22(c), section 20 and section 29 of NDPS
Act, 1985. The cumulative quantity of the contraband recovered from
the applicant/accused and co-accused in the present crime is
commercial quantity. Therefore, rigours of section 37 of NDPS Act are
also applicable to the case of applicant/accused and the co-accused.
6.

As per section 37(2) of NDPS Act limitations on grant of
bail specified in clause (b) of sub section (1) of section 37 of NDPS Act
are in addition to the limitations under the Code of Criminal Procedure
NDPS BA No.1094/2023
..7..

in Spl. Case No.300/2024
or any other law for the time being in force on granting of bail. To check
the menance of drugs flooding the market and in order to effectively
control and eradicate menance of drug legislature has incorporated
above limitations. The above limitations are in public interest.
Therefore, for exercise of discretion for grant of bail twin conditions
under clause (b) of sub section (1) of NDPS Act must be satisfied. Detail
examination of evidence on record is not necessary while considering
the bail application. Negation of bail is rule and grant of bail is
exception under above clause.
7.

From the appreciation of the material on record it appears
that, specific information was received by the respondent that,
applicant/accused No.1, co-accused Nos., 2 to 8 are doing the business
of drug trafficking in Mumbai and on 15/08/2023 they are bringing the
contraband in Ertiga car bearing registration No.MH-04-KF-1514 and
Creta
car
bearing
registration
No.MH-04-GZ-2772.

From
the
appreciation of the material on record it reveals that, accordingly the
accused Nos.1 to 6 were found in Ertiga car bearing registration
No.MH-04-KF-1514 and contraband is recovered from their possession.
From the appreciation of the material on record it appears that, as
disclosed by the applicant/accused No.1 the co-accused Nos.7, 8 and 9
had been by the car bearing registration No.MH-01-EG-9272 and 69.73
gram Ketamine and 54.50 gram Mephedrone (MD) was recovered from
the possession of the co-accused No.8. As the accused Nos.1 to 9 were
found in private vehicles and contraband is recovered from each of
them prima facie their possession of contraband appears to be conscious
possession and it appears that, they were having knowledge that coaccused are also carrying the contraband. From the appreciation of the
material on record it appears that, statement of the applicant/accused
NDPS BA No.1094/2023
..8..

in Spl. Case No.300/2024
No.1 that car of the co-accused Nos.7, 8 and 9 do come after some time
laid to the discovery of the fact proving complicity of the accused Nos.1
to 6 with the other co-accused Nos.7 to 9 and other accused. From the
appreciation of the material on record entire chain of circumstances
clearly points out that, applicant/accused and co-accused acted in
conspiracy.

CDR
on
record
also
indicate
the
nexus
between
applicant/accused and co-accused. Therefore, from the appreciation of
the material on record there appear positive material to indicate the
nexus between applicant/accused and co-accused. As such, from the
appreciation of the material on record provision of section 29 of the
NDPS Act appears to be applicable to the case of the applicant/accused.
As the quantity of contraband recovered from the possession of the coaccused No.8 is commercial quantity, the rigours of section 37 of the
NDPS Act are applicable to the case of the applicant/accused.
8.

In view of mandate of section 37 of the NDPS Act the
burden is upon the accused to show that, there are reasonable grounds
to believe that, he is not guilty of the offence alleged. However, the
applicant/accused has not demonstrated any reasonable grounds to
believe that, he has not committed the offence alleged. From the
appreciation of the material on record there are reasonable grounds to
believe that, applicant/accused has committed the offence punishable
under section 8(c) r/w section 22(c), section 20 and section 29 of NDPS
Act. Moreover, considering the nature of offence and the matter on
record and the fact that, huge quantity of contraband was recovered
from the applicant/accused and co-accused court is also not satisfied
that, the applicant/accused will not commit the similar offence again.
As such conditions under section 37 of NDPS Act are not fulfilled and
therefore, embargo put by section 37 of NDPS act is not lifted.

NDPS BA No.1094/2023
9.

..9..

in Spl. Case No.300/2024
Prima facie there is no material on record, so as to doubt
genuineness of the prosecution case. Prima facie there appear no
inherent
infirmities
or
improbability
in
the
prosecution
case.

Considering the nature of offence the possibility that, after release of
the
applicant/accused,
the
applicant/accused
may
tamper
the
prosecution evidence or influence the witnesses or may involve in
commission of such offences cannot be ruled out at this stage.
Therefore, at this stage there appear necessity for the further detention
of the applicant/accused.
10.

Considering the above facts and discussion and prima facie
appreciation of the material on record release of the applicant/accused
at this stage is likely to be prejudicial to the interest of the society at
large. Liberal approach in grant of bail in such kind of offences under
NDPS Act is also uncalled.
11.

On prima facie appreciation of the material on record and
considering the nature of the offence, gravity of the offence there
appear no justifiable grounds for releasing applicant/accused on bail at
this stage.

As such the present application is liable to be rejected.

Hence, the following order.

ORDER
1.

NDPS BA No.1094/2023 of applicant/accused No.01 Sahil
Ramjanali
Khan
in
C.R.

No.300/2024, is rejected.

No.56/2023
in
Special
Case
NDPS BA No.1094/2023
2.

..10..

in Spl. Case No.300/2024
NDPS BA No.1094/2023 is disposed of accordingly.
(Pronounced in open Court)
Date : 29/02/2024.

(K.P. Kshirsagar)
N.D.P.S Special Judge
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Bombay (CR.43)
Dictated on
:
29/02/2024
Transcribed on
:
29/02/2024
Checked on
:
01/03/2024
Signed on
:
04/03/2024
NDPS BA No.1094/2023
..11..

in Spl. Case No.300/2024
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE
04.03.2024
TIME
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
01.36 p.m.

Sanjay Baliram Kaskar
(Stenographer Grade-I)
Name of the Judge
H.H.J. SHRI. K.P. KSHIRSAGAR
NDPS Spl. Judge (C.R.No.43)
Date of Pronouncement of
Judgment/Order.

29/02/2024
Judgment/order signed by P.O
on
04/03/2024
Judgment/order uploaded on
04/03/2023