Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Paul Chikwu vs State Of Maharashtra on 4 February, 2026

2026:BHC-AS:5996

                    Prasad Rajput
                        (P.A.)                                                 15_BA_1946_2024.doc




                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                      BAIL APPLICATION NO.1946 OF 2024


                    Paul Chikwu                                                     ...Applicant
                          Versus
                    State of Maharashtra                                            ...Respondent


                    Mr. Dilip Mishra i/by Zehra Charania, Arfa Shaikh and Ayaz
                          Khan, for the Applicant.
                    Ms. Anuja S. Gotad, APP for the Respondent - State.
                    API - Pallavi Dhagepatil, EOW, Wagle Division - 5, present.


                                                  CORAM          DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.
                                                  DATED:         04TH FEBRUARY 2026
                    PC:-


                    1.               By this Application, the Applicant seeks his

                    enlargement on bail in connection with C.R.No. 103 of 2023

                    dated 29th March, 2023 registered with the Kasarvadavli

                    Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections

                    8(c), 2(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic

                    Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'NDPS').




                                                            Page 1 of 7
                                                       th
                                                      4 February 2026


                   ::: Uploaded on - 05/02/2026                           ::: Downloaded on - 05/02/2026 20:40:53 :::
  Prasad Rajput
     (P.A.)                                             15_BA_1946_2024.doc


 2.               The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on

 receipt of secret information, the officials of the police station

 acted upon the said information and apprehended the

 Applicant. After following the due procedure prescribed under

 the NDPS Act, they conducted a search of the Applicant and

 recovered 32 grams of Cocaine and 22 LSD blots from his

 possession. Pursuant to registration of the FIR against the

 Applicant, the Applicant came to be arrested on 28th March,

 2023.



 3.               The Applicant made an Application seeking bail

 before the Special Judge (NDPS), Thane, however, by order

 dated 7th February, 2024, the said application was rejected.

 Hence, the Applicant has filed the present Bail Application for

 the relief as prayed.



 4.               Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the Applicant,

 advanced a significant argument. He submits that the quantity

 of Cocaine allegedly recovered from the possession of the

 Applicant is 32 grams, whereas the commercial quantity



                                     Page 2 of 7
                                th
                               4 February 2026


::: Uploaded on - 05/02/2026                       ::: Downloaded on - 05/02/2026 20:40:53 :::
  Prasad Rajput
     (P.A.)                                             15_BA_1946_2024.doc


 prescribed is 100 grams. He further submits that the bulk of

 LSD recovered from the Applicant was marked as 'B', and the

 receipt of the said sample of the contraband record that the

 FSL has received 'B1'. The quantity received by the FSL is

 entire bulk of LSD and not a sample. Hence, Mr. Mishra

 submits that the marking on the entire bulk of contraband

 containing LSD ought to have been marked also as 'B' instead

 of 'B1'. This discrepancy, according to him, lends a doubt on

 the credibility on the contraband sent by the police to the FSL

 for chemical analysis. On this ground, Mr. Mishra prays that

 the Applicant be enlarged on bail.



 5.               Ms. Gotad, learned APP representing the State,

 submits that save and except and this particular discrepancy,

 there is no material on record to indicate that the Applicant

 has not committed the said offence. She submits that, in fact,

 the contraband was recovered from his person. She also

 points to the antecedents of the Applicant. She submits that

 there is a criminal antecedent against the Applicant registered




                                     Page 3 of 7
                                th
                               4 February 2026


::: Uploaded on - 05/02/2026                       ::: Downloaded on - 05/02/2026 20:40:53 :::
  Prasad Rajput
     (P.A.)                                                     15_BA_1946_2024.doc


 with the Khar Police Station. However, Mr. Mishra interjects to

 say that in the charge-sheet the police officials have not stated

 in the said CR pending against the present Applicant.



 6.               I have heard learned counsel for the respective

 parties and perused the record of the case with their

 assistance.



 7.               Despite      Ms.        Gotad         submits     regarding          the

 antecedent of the Applicant, admittedly, no such antecedent is

 recorded in the charge-sheet. Moreover, the Applicant is in

 custody since 28th March, 2023, and charges have not been

 framed as on date. Additionally, the discrepancy regarding

 marking of the contraband seized from the Applicant and that

 sent to the FSL for chemical analysis are significantly distinct.

 Prima facie it appears that the Applicant may not have

 committed the alleged offence.



 8.               In view of the aforesaid, I am inclined to enlarge

 the Applicant on bail. It is accordingly ordered as under:-



                                          Page 4 of 7
                                     th
                                 4 February 2026


::: Uploaded on - 05/02/2026                               ::: Downloaded on - 05/02/2026 20:40:53 :::
  Prasad Rajput
     (P.A.)                                             15_BA_1946_2024.doc


                                     ORDER

i) The Applicant be enlarged on bail, on executing PR Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/ with one or two local sureties in the like amount;

ii) The Applicant shall attend the Trial Court concerned on each and every date unless exempted by the orders of the Trial Court concerned;

iii) The Applicant shall also attend the Police Station concerned once in a month between 11:00 a.m. to 02:00 p.m., till the charges are framed;

iv) If the Applicant has not deposited his passport, if any, the Applicant shall deposit the same with the Police Station concerned;

v) The Applicant shall not leave India, without the permission of the Trial Court;





                                     Page 5 of 7
                                th
                               4 February 2026


::: Uploaded on - 05/02/2026                       ::: Downloaded on - 05/02/2026 20:40:53 :::
  Prasad Rajput
     (P.A.)                                             15_BA_1946_2024.doc


       vi)        The Applicant shall not tamper or attempt to

influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case;

vii) The Applicant shall inform his latest place of residence and contact number immediately after being released and / or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time to the Court seized of the matter and to the Investigating Officer of the Police Station concerned;

viii) The Applicant to co-operate with the conduct of the trial;

ix) Any infraction of the aforesaid conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.

9. Application is allowed in the above terms and is accordingly disposed of.





                                     Page 6 of 7
                                th
                               4 February 2026


::: Uploaded on - 05/02/2026                       ::: Downloaded on - 05/02/2026 20:40:53 :::
  Prasad Rajput
     (P.A.)                                                15_BA_1946_2024.doc


10. It is made clear that the observations made herein are prima facie and are confined to this Application and the learned Trial Judge to decide the case on its own merits, uninfluenced by the observations made herein.

(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J) Page 7 of 7 th 4 February 2026 ::: Uploaded on - 05/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 05/02/2026 20:40:53 :::