1
BA 966/18 (RA 1239/18)
IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL JUDGE FOR N.D.P.S CASES FOR
GREATER BOMBAY AT MUMBAI
NDPS BAIL APPLICATION NO.966/2018
IN
N.D.P.S. R.A. No. 1239/2018
Tanaji Kalu Kate@ Tike
..Applicant/Accused
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra,
(at the instance of ANC Worli Unit,
C.R. No. 60/18)
…Respondents
Appearances:н
Ld. Advocate Mr. Liman for applicant/accused.
Ld. APP Mr. P.S Tawade for Respondent/State.
Coram :H.H.J The Special Judge (NDPS)
Shri. V.V. Vidwans (CR No.42).
Date : 24.12.2018.
ORAL ORDER
1.

This is an application for grant of regular bail filed on
behalf of accused Tanaji Kalu Kate@ Tike u/s. 439 of Cr.P.C. Say of IO
and Ld. APP for the state was called and it is submitted on record vide
Exh.2. Seen and considered the say.
2.

I have heard Ld Adv.Mr. Liman for the accused and Ld. APP
Mr. Tawade for the State.
3.

It is submitted on behalf of the accused/ applicant that,
ANC Crime Branch, Mumbai has arrested the accused on 21.11.2018 for
allegedly committing offences under NDPS Act in a raid conducted by
API Marathe, attached to ANC Worli Unit while he was on patrolling
duty. As per prosecution case, 01 kg 880 grams Ganja has been seized
2
BA 966/18 (RA 1239/18)
by police from the possession of accused no.1/ bag. During
investigation, accused no.1 has revealed name of the present applicant/
accused and therefore, he has been arrested in this case. It is submitted
that, the quantity of the seized contraband in this case is nonн
commercial quantity, therefore stringent provisions of Sec.37 of NDPS
Act are not been attracted. This Court has already granted bail to the
accused no.1. Present applicant/ accused has been arrested on the basis
of statement of coнaccused, which is not admissible in law. The
applicant/ accused is permanent resident at the given address and not
likely to abscond. He is ready to abide by the conditions, if any imposed
by this Court and that he may be granted bail.
4.

Ld. APP for the State/ANC has strongly opposed the
application and relied on the say. He submitted that, present applicant/
accused has been arrested in this case for supplying Ganja to the
accused no.1 and charged of the conspiracy u/s. 29 of the Act. Though
quantity of the seized contraband is not commercial quantity, it is more
than small quantity. Present applicant/ accused is having criminal
antecedent and Crime No. 19/99 u/s. 379, 427 of IPC; C.R. No. 174/05
u/s. 394 r/w. 34 of IPC and C.R No. 29/06 u/s. 399 of IPC r/w.
Sec.37(1) and 135 of Bombay Police Act are pending against him and if
bail is granted to him, he is likely to abscond and indulge in similar
activities in future also. Investigation is in progress, therefore
application is liable to be rejected.
5.

I have gone through the grounds stated in the application
and also considered the say filed on behalf of the State / respondent. I
have also taken into consideration oral submissions made by Ld.
Counsels for both sides. It can be seen that the present applicant/
3
BA 966/18 (RA 1239/18)
accused has been arrested on the basis of statement of coнaccused
during investigation of the case. Nothing has been seized from his
possession. 01 kg 880 grams of Ganja has been recovered from the
possession of accused no.1, which is not commercial quantity and hence
stringent provisions of sec.37 of NDPS Act are not attracted. It can be
seen from the say filed on behalf of the State that, the applicant/
accused is having criminal antecedents and some cases are pending
against him, but it is well settled legal position that, mere pendency of
criminal cases is not sufficient to consider the accused as a habitual
offender. The accused/applicant is a permanent resident of the given
address and having residential proof as per submission made by his
Counsel. He has been arrested on the basis of statement of coнaccused,
which is not permissible in law. Under the above circumstances, I am of
the opinion that, if this application is allowed subject to conditions it
will serve the purpose of the prosecution. Hence, I proceed to pass
following order:н
ORDER
1.

Bail Application No.966 of 2018 is hereby allowed.

2.

Applicant/ accused Tanaji Kalu Kate@ Tike shall be
released on his executing P.R.Bond of Rs.50,000/н
(Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with one or two sureties,
one of which should be local surety, to the above
extent.

3.

The applicant/accused to attend the office of ANC
Worli Unit for the purpose of investigation once in a
fortnight on 1st and 3rd Saturday of the month
between 11.00 am to 2.00 pm till filing of the chargeн
4
BA 966/18 (RA 1239/18)
sheet. If I.O is absent, then he should give attendance
to the PSO Incharge.
4.

The applicant/ accused shall not tamper with
prosecution witnesses/evidence in any manner and
coнoperate in the investigation.

5.

The applicant/ accused shall furnish his cell/ landline
number and also of his two nearest relatives or his
two friends each, preferably residing in Mumbai.

6.

The applicant/accused shall produce the proof of his
identity and proof of residence at Mumbai at the time
of executing the bail bond.

7.

The applicant/ accused shall not commit similar
offence while on bail.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions by
the applicant/accused, it would entail cancellation of
bail.
Bail Appln.No.966/18 stands disposed of accordingly.

Date:н 24.12.2018
Dictated on: 24.12.2018
Transcribed on: 28.12.2018
HHJ signed on: 28.12.2018
(V.V. Vidwans)
N.D.P.S Special Judge
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Bombay (CR 42).

5
BA 966/18 (RA 1239/18)
УCERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ ORDER.
UPLOADED ON : 28.12.2018
TIME: 12.15 pm
(NITIN V. UBALE)
SELECTION GR. STENOGRAPHER.

Name of the judge (with Court Room No.)

Shri V.V. Vidwans, Spl. Judge & Addl. Sessions
Judge (C.R. 42)
Date of pronouncement of Judgment/ Order
24.12.2018
Judgment/ order signed by P.O on
28.12.2018
Judgment/ order uploaded on
28.12.2018