Greater Mumbai, January 6, 2024 – In a notable decision, 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 granted bail to Farid Rehamatulla Shaikh, a 26-year-old resident of Kurla West. The order, dated January 5, 2024, and uploaded today, concludes NDPS Bail Application No. 715 of 2023, connected to Special Case No. 1936 of 2023, which originated from C.R. No. 59/2023 registered at Kurla Police Station.

Shaikh was implicated in a case where a substantial quantity of narcotics, 82.25 grams of Charas and 102.5 grams of Mephedrone (MD) – a commercial quantity under the NDPS Act – was allegedly recovered from co-accused No. 1, Shamshad Hussain Shafi Ansari, on May 2, 2023. The prosecution’s case hinged significantly on the disclosure statement of Ansari, who reportedly stated that he had procured the contraband from Shaikh and other co-accused individuals.

Advocate Gorakh Liman, representing Shaikh, argued that apart from the co-accused’s disclosure statement, there was no concrete evidence linking his client to the recovered narcotics. He pointed out the absence of any mobile phone records showing communication between Shaikh and Ansari around the time of the offense. The call detail records presented by the prosecution pertained to a period a month prior to the incident. Furthermore, Advocate Liman highlighted that the mobile numbers mentioned in the customer application forms were not registered in Shaikh’s name, and no contraband or mobile phone was recovered directly from him. He contended that the disclosure statement, leading only to the alleged place of supply without any independent recovery, was inadmissible under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. With the final report already filed, signifying the completion of the investigation, Advocate Liman asserted the lack of admissible evidence to connect Shaikh to the crime and requested bail, assuring the court of his client’s cooperation and adherence to any imposed conditions. He also relied on several judgments from the Hon’ble Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court to support his arguments.

Conversely, the learned APP Mr. Tarange argued that the recovery of a commercial quantity of contraband along with a weighing scale from the possession of co-accused Ansari indicated his involvement in drug peddling. He emphasized Ansari’s disclosure statement implicating Shaikh as a supplier, asserting that this provided sufficient material to link Shaikh to the crime. The APP contended that the commercial quantity involved triggered the stringent provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, requiring the accused to demonstrate reasonable grounds for believing he is not guilty, which the prosecution argued Shaikh had failed to do.

However, Additional Sessions Judge Kshirsagar, after carefully considering the arguments and the evidence on record, ruled in favor of granting bail to Farid Rehamatulla Shaikh. The court acknowledged the recovery of a commercial quantity, which typically invokes the restrictions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Nevertheless, the court meticulously analyzed the evidence presented against Shaikh.

In a significant observation, the court concurred with the defense’s argument regarding the inadmissibility of the disclosure statement under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, noting that it did not lead to the discovery of any fact distinctly related to the crime that could independently connect Shaikh. The court also highlighted the lack of mobile phone communication records between Shaikh and the co-accused around the time of the offense and the fact that no incriminating material was recovered from Shaikh himself.

Based on this assessment, the court concluded that there appeared to be no substantial independent legally admissible evidence on record to establish a live link between Shaikh and the co-accused or to suggest a conspiracy. Finding material discrepancies in the prosecution’s case and prima facie reasonable grounds to believe that Shaikh may not be guilty of the alleged offenses, the court held that the conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act were also fulfilled, thus lifting the stringent embargo on granting bail.

Emphasizing the fundamental right to personal liberty and the presumption of innocence, the court stated that the primary objective of bail is to secure the accused’s presence during trial, not to punish or preventatively detain. Considering Shaikh’s cooperation during the investigation and his undertaking to cooperate during the trial, the court deemed his presence could be secured even if released on bail.

Consequently, NDPS Bail Application No. 715 of 2023 was allowed, and Farid Rehamatulla Shaikh was ordered to be released on bail upon executing a personal bond of ₹50,000 (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety of a like amount, subject to the following conditions:

• Shaikh must cooperate with the Investigating Officer and be available for interrogation as and when required.
• He shall not tamper with prosecution evidence or influence prosecution witnesses in any manner.
• He must cooperate in the early disposal of the trial.
• He shall not commit any criminal offense while on bail.
• Shaikh and his surety must provide their respective mobile numbers, present addresses, and proof of residence at the time of executing the bail bond/surety bond.

The decision to grant bail in a case involving a commercial quantity of narcotics, based on the lack of direct evidence and the inadmissibility of the co-accused’s disclosure statement, underscores the importance of independent corroboration in NDPS cases. The order, pronounced on January 5, 2024, and officially uploaded today, January 6, 2024, at 4:47 p.m., provides a temporary relief to Farid Rehamatulla Shaikh as he awaits further legal proceedings in the matter.