Mumbai, Maharashtra – On October 11, 2018, the Special Judge for NDPS Cases at Greater Mumbai, M. S. Mungale (C.R. No. 44), granted bail to Shahid Iqbal Shaikh, 35, in Bail Application No. 695 of 2018. Shaikh, identified as original accused No. 1, was arrested on September 28, 2018, in connection with NDPS C.R. No. 43 of 2018 registered by the Ghatkopar ANC.
The court’s decision was based on the fact that the quantity of “Ganja” seized from Shaikh’s possession – 1 kilogram and 500 grams – fell within the “intermediate quantity” category, meaning it was above a small quantity but below a commercial quantity. This distinction is crucial under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act), as it exempts the applicant from the stringent bail restrictions imposed by Section 37 of the Act for commercial quantities.
The Case Details
According to the First Information Report (FIR) and remand report, Shahid Iqbal Shaikh was arrested along with three other individuals. The quantities of Ganja seized were:
- Shahid Iqbal Shaikh (Accused No. 1): 1 kg 500 grams
- Accused No. 2: 1 kg 200 grams
- Accused No. 3: 1 kg 200 grams
- Accused No. 4: 1 kg 100 grams
Shaikh’s legal counsel, Mr. Ashish Baraskar, argued that the seized quantity was non-commercial and therefore, the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act did not apply. He also highlighted that Shaikh is a permanent resident of Mumbai.
Prosecution’s Opposition and Court’s Stance
The Investigating Officer (I.O.) opposed the bail application, submitting a reply on October 10, 2018. The I.O. contended that Shaikh and his co-accused were “habitual offenders” and that the ANC, Ghatkopar Unit, and Cuffe Parade had received multiple phone complaints alleging that these individuals were illegally selling Ganja and other contraband substances to students of Jhunjhunwala College, Indradev Singh International School, and Hindi High School in Ghatkopar (West), Mumbai. The I.O. expressed concerns that if released on bail, Shaikh would continue his “unlawful activities.”
However, the Special Judge, M. S. Mungale, noted that while the I.O. made these oral contentions, no specific complainant was named, nor was any copy of a registered complaint produced by the I.O. or the learned Additional Public Prosecutor (A.P.P.), Mr. B. G. Rajput.
Despite the lack of concrete evidence for these allegations, the court acknowledged the I.O.’s concerns regarding potential harm to students. To address this, the judge incorporated specific conditions into the bail order designed to prevent any alleged future illicit activities by the applicant.
Bail Conditions and Restrictions
The court allowed Bail Application No. 695/2018 under the following terms and conditions:
- Bail Bond: Shahid Iqbal Shaikh is to be released on a Personal Recognizance (P.R.) bond of Rs. 30,000/- and a surety of the like amount. He has the liberty to submit one or more sureties to fulfill the total surety amount.
- Identification Proof: Before release, Shaikh must submit his address proof and photograph on record.
- Restricted Area: Crucially, Shaikh is prohibited from entering within a ½ kilometer area of Jhunjhunwala College, Indradev Singh International School, and Hindi High School in Ghatkopar (West), Mumbai, without prior court permission, until further orders.
- No Tampering: He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
- Reporting Schedule: Shaikh must report to the ANC, Ghatkopar Unit, every Sunday between 9:00 AM and 11:00 AM until the charge-sheet is filed. After the charge-sheet is filed and until the disposal of the case, he must report to the ANC, Ghatkopar Unit, on the last Sunday of each month during the same time frame.
- Bail Cancellation Warning: If Shaikh makes two consecutive defaults in reporting to the ANC, Ghatkopar Unit, his bail bonds will be cancelled.
The application was disposed of accordingly. The order was dictated on October 11, 2018, transcribed on October 15, 2018, and signed on October 16, 2018. It was subsequently uploaded on October 17, 2018, at 5:00 PM.
This ruling highlights the judiciary’s approach in balancing an individual’s right to liberty with public safety concerns, especially in cases involving alleged drug peddling near educational institutions.