Mumbai, May 2, 2025 (Friday, 10:19 PM IST, Thane, Maharashtra): The Special Court for Narcotic Drug and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, at Gr. Bombay, presided over by Additional Sessions Judge K.P. Kshirsagar (C.R.43), has rejected the bail application of Salim Ahmed Hussain Shaikh, in connection with Spl. LAC/C.R. No.602/2023 registered at Dharavi Police Station. The order, dated November 24, 2023, was issued in NDPS Bail Application No.868 of 2023, filed in relation to NDPS Remand Application No.1083 of 2023.

Salim Ahmed Hussain Shaikh was arrested in connection with offences punishable under section 8(c) r/w section 22(c) of the Narcotic Drug and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act).

In his bail application, Salim Shaikh, represented by Ld. Adv. Mr. Amrish Salunkhe, argued that 99 bottles of Chlorpheniramine Maleate & Codeine Phosphate syrup, PHENSIREST cough syrup of 100 ml each, were allegedly recovered from his possession. The defense claimed false implication and pointed to a delay in carrying out proceedings under section 52A of the NDPS Act, suggesting a possibility of tampering. Mr. Salunkhe asserted his client’s residency in Mumbai and his willingness to abide by any court-imposed conditions. He relied on a citation from the Delhi High Court, Kashif Vs. Narcotics Control Bureau.

Ld. APP Mr. Rajput, representing the prosecution, argued that a commercial quantity of contraband was recovered from the applicant’s conscious possession, thus invoking section 37 of the NDPS Act. The prosecution emphasized that the investigation was ongoing and the final report was yet to be filed. The APP contended that the question of delay under section 52A could not be considered at this stage. He further argued that the applicant was likely to commit a similar offence if released on bail and that his presence could not be secured. The prosecution urged the court to reject the bail application.

Additional Sessions Judge K.P. Kshirsagar rejected the bail application. The court noted that the alleged offence was grievous, carrying a potential sentence of up to 20 years imprisonment and a fine of up to One Lakh rupees. Considering the recovery of a commercial quantity of contraband from the applicant’s conscious possession, the court found that the rigors of section 37 of the NDPS Act were applicable.

The court emphasized that section 37(2) of the NDPS Act imposes additional limitations on granting bail, beyond those under the Code of Criminal Procedure or any other law. These limitations, aimed at controlling the drug menace, require the satisfaction of twin conditions under clause (b) of sub-section (1) of the NDPS Act for the exercise of discretion in granting bail. The court stated that a detailed examination of evidence was unnecessary at this stage and that negation of bail was the rule, with grant of bail being an exception.

Addressing the defense’s argument regarding non-compliance of section 52A, the court cited the Supreme Court judgment in State of Punjab Vs. Balbir Singh, which stated that violations of sections 52 and 57 of the NDPS Act do not automatically invalidate a trial. The court held that it must be shown that such non-compliance caused prejudice and resulted in a failure of justice.

The court found no substance in the applicant’s contention regarding a delay in proceedings under section 52A, noting that the investigation was ongoing and the final report had not been filed. The court observed that there was no material to determine whether the prosecution had taken out an application before the Magistrate for carrying out proceedings under section 52A within a reasonable time.

The court concluded that the applicant had failed to demonstrate reasonable grounds to believe that he was not guilty of the offence, and there were reasonable grounds to believe that he had committed the offence punishable under section 8(c) r/w section 22(c) of the NDPS Act. Considering the quantity of contraband recovered, the court was not satisfied that the applicant would not commit a similar offence again. As such, the court found that the conditions under section 37 of the NDPS Act were not fulfilled, and the embargo it imposed was not lifted.

The court found no reason to doubt the genuineness of the prosecution case and noted the possibility of the applicant tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses if released. The court deemed further detention necessary for the ongoing investigation.

Considering the facts, the court concluded that releasing the applicant at this stage would be prejudicial to the interest of society and that a liberal approach to bail in such NDPS offences was uncalled for.

The court ordered the rejection of NDPS Bail Application No.868/2023. The order was dictated, transcribed, checked, and signed on November 24, 2023, and uploaded on November 29, 2023.

This denial of bail highlights the strict stance taken by the special court in cases involving commercial quantities of contraband under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the stringent conditions for granting bail as mandated by section 37 of the Act. The applicant will remain in judicial custody pending further proceedings.