Gujarat High Court
Sahid Kasam Sumara vs National Investigation Agency on 20 August, 2025
Author: Ilesh J. Vora
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2197/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (REGULAR BAIL) NO. 2197 of 2023
==========================================================
SAHID KASAM SUMARA
Versus
NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ZUBIN BHARDA, ADVOCATE WITH MR A A ZABUAWALA(6823) for the
Appellant(s) No. 1
KSHITIJ M AMIN(7572) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
MR LB DABHI, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No.2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL
Date : 20/08/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL)
1. The present appeal is preferred under section 21 of the National Investigation Agency Act 2008 in connection with the FIR being registered as ATS PS-III-CR No.1 of 2018 registered at ATS Police Station, District Ahmedabad dated 12.8.2018, re-registered as FIR No.26 of 2020 NIA/DLI registered with NIA Head Quarters, Delhi, District New Delhi dated 2.7.2020 for the offences repunishable under sections 8(c), 21(b), 24, 25, 27(A) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985, section 120-B of Indian Page 1 of 13 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Thu Aug 21 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 21 22:33:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2197/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2025 undefined Penal Code and sections 17 and 18 of the UAPA Act 1967 and has prayed to allow the appeal by releasing the appellant on regular bail.
2. The appellant had preferred Misc. Application No.12 of 2023 before the learned Special NIA Court, Ahmedabad for enlarging him on bail which came to be rejected by the learned Sessions Judge vide order dated 6.4.2023.
3. Learned advocate Mr.Zubin Bharda appearing for the appellant had submitted that :
(a) That the present appellant is not named in the FIR.
(b) That there is no whisper in the FIR and no role is attributed to the appellant in the said FIR.
(c) On perusing the statement of Abdul Aziz Bhagad who was arrested at the spot with muddamal has not Page 2 of 13 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Thu Aug 21 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 21 22:33:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2197/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2025 undefined revealed the name of the appellant in the first two statements. However, subsequently the name of the appellant came to be revealed.
(d) That from the papers of the chargesheet, the Investigating Officer is not able to connect the present appellant in the offence in question.
(e) That the prosecution has failed to prima facie point out the presence of the appellant at any place nor was he found with any contraband substance and the appellant has been wrongly implicated in the offence on the basis of the statement of the co-accused.
(f) That on perusal of the chargesheet papers, the main accused are from Pakistan i.e. Bhaijan and Nabi Bax who are mastermind of the offence and have supplied contraband from Pakistan to Amritsar, Punjab and loaded heroin contraband article from Pakistan to the Port Salaya, Kachchh and thus, the appellant is not connected with any offence whatsoever and has been wrongly implicated in the Page 3 of 13 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Thu Aug 21 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 21 22:33:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2197/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2025 undefined offence merely on the basis of mobile number, call details, vehicle and other travel details of the accused persons.
However, the prosecution could not prima facie point out from the chargesheet papers with regard to involvement of the appellant in the alleged offence.
(g) That there is no recovery or discovery of the contraband article from the appellant.
(h) That except three statements of Abdul Aziz Bhagad who is alleged to have brought drugs in his fisherman boat at Salaya village and there is no other connecting evidence, more particularly, when the alleged offence is of the year 2018 and supplementary chargesheet against the appellant is registered as NIA Special Case No.2 of 2022.
4. Learned advocate Mr.Kshitij Amin appears for respondent No.1 and learned APP Mr.L.B.Dabhi appears for respondent No.2 - State.
Page 4 of 13 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Thu Aug 21 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 21 22:33:19 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2197/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2025 undefined
5. Relying upon the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the NIA - respondent No.1, learned advocate Mr.Kshitij Amin would submit that :
(a) That during the investigation, it is revealled that on the direction of Arshad Razak Sota @ Raju Dubai -
accused No.4, Rafik Adam Sumra - accused No.2 and Shahid Kasam Sumra - accused No.11 i.e. present appellant delivered total 295 kg out of 500 kg of heroin to Nazir Ahmed - accused No.3, Manzoor Ahmad - accused No.5 and Simranjit Singh Sandhu - WA-2, whereas remaining 200 kg heroin was delivered by the appellant and Razak Adam Sumra - accused No.6 to Karim Md.Siraj - accused No.7 and Sunil Vithal Barmase - accused No.8.
(b) It is further argued that Indresh Rambachan Nishad - accused No.9 transported it to associates of Simranjit Singh Sandhu - WA-2 in Amritsar, Punjab who received 60 kg, 35 kg and 200 kg quantity of heroin at Unjha and lastly 200 kg at Talwada Road on different dates Page 5 of 13 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Thu Aug 21 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 21 22:33:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2197/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2025 undefined between 16.3.2018 and 1.12.2019.
(c) It is further argued that the present appellant had received Rs.25 lacs from Arshad Razak Sota @ Raju Dubai in Mandvi Kachchh through VP Angadia as part of proceeds for delivering consignment. Similarly, the present appellant distributed Rs.17 lacs to Karim Md. Siraj - accused No.7 and Sunil Barmase - accused No.8 through Angadia in Bhuj. That the present appellant further received Rs.17 lacs from Pakistani wanted accused Hajisaab @ Bhaijaan - WA-4 through Hawala in Dubai while he was absconding after commission of the crime.
(d) It is further argued that there are ample documentary evidences in the form of forensic reports regarding soil where they dumped drugs, seizure panchnama of vehicle Ritz bearing registration No.GJ 12 CD 6819 used for delivering 295 kg of narcotics drugs herin to Nazir Ahmad - accused No.2 and Manzoor Ahmad - accused No.5 in Unjha, Gujarat, seizure panchnama dated Page 6 of 13 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Thu Aug 21 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 21 22:33:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2197/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2025 undefined 2.10.2018 of the mobile handset used by the present appellant with Arshad Sota @ Raju Dubai - accused No.4, seizure panchnama dated 22.10.2018 for the mobile handset used by Manzoor Ahmad - accused No.5 for communicating with Rafik Adam Sumra - accused No.2, appellant herein and Arshad Sota @ Raju Dubai - accused No.4, identification panchnama dated 17.2.2020 i.e. at village Baag from where the remaining stock of 200 kg heroin was dug out on the direction of the appellant and were loaded in the car and delivered to Karim Md. Siraj - accused No.7 and Sunil Vithal Barmase - accused No.8. There are also technical evidences in the form of call details record, money transactions and the statements of the witnesses taken under section 164 of CrPC as well as evidence recorded before the learned trial Court who have identified the present appellant despite threat being given to the said witness by the family members of the present appellant for which the FIR is also registered being CR No.11205012250001 for the threat given on 25.12.2024 and the FIR being registered before the Mandvi Marin Police Page 7 of 13 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Thu Aug 21 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 21 22:33:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2197/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2025 undefined Station on 5.1.2025. Thus, it is argued that there is ample material on record both oral as well as documentary evidences pointing out active involvement of the present appellant in the alleged crime and has thus argued to reject the appeal.
6. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the papers of chargesheet as well as affidavit- in-reply filed by respondent No.1 - NIA.
7. The appellant is in custody since 26.9.2021. It also transpires from the affidavit-in-reply that the present appellant came to be arrested on 26.9.2021 after request by NIA having issued look out notice 2143633 in the name of the appellant dated 29.4.2021. It also appears from the papers that an application to the Police Inspector, ATS Ahmedabad was given by Junus Taiyab and Zakir alleging that they are witnesses in the NDPS case and were being threatened by the family members of the present appellant, pursuant to which the FIR is also filed on 5.1.2025 before Page 8 of 13 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Thu Aug 21 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 21 22:33:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2197/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2025 undefined Mandvi Marine Police Station in which family members of the appellant herein have also been granted anticipatory bail.
8. It also transpires from the papers of the chargesheet that the appellant is one of the conspirators and aided Arshad Sota @ Raju Dubai - accused No.4, Simranjit Singh Sandhu - WA-2 and Hajisaab @ Bhaijaan - WA-4. That the present appellant along with Rafik Adam Sumra - accused No.2 received 495 kg narcotic drugs heroin from the Indian fishing vessel which in turn was received from Pakistani vessel after being transported to India by way two trips. Initially, the appellant facilitated delivery of 295 kg heroin from Gujarat to Amritsar, Punjab and as per the conspiracy, with the help of Rafik Adam Sumra - accused No.2 delivered 60 kg, 35 kg and 200 kg heroin near APMC Market, Unjha to the accomplice of Simranjit Singh Sandhu WA-2 i.e. Nazir Ahmad - accused No.3 and Manzoor Ahmad - accused No.5 in Maruti Ritz car of Rafik Adam Sumra - accused No.2 which is bearing Page 9 of 13 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Thu Aug 21 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 21 22:33:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2197/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2025 undefined registration No.GJ 12 CD 6819 and the appellant along with Rafik Adam Sumra - accused No.2 concealled the remaining 200 kg heroin in a pit in the field of Rafik Adam Sumra - accused No.2 and Razak Adam Sumra - accused No.6 near poultry farm at village Baag. Remaining 200 kg heroin was delivered from Gujarat to Amritsar Punjab through Indresh Nishad - accused No.9 with the help of Razak Adam Sumra
- accused No.6, Karim Md.Siraj - accused No.7 and Sunil Vithal Barmase - accused No.8. It transpires from the record that the amount of alleged drugs is costing approximately Rs.1500 crores in the international market and the proceeds of the drugs are received through Havala entry from Pakistan, Dubai and India.
9. It also prima facie appears that the appellant has received Rs.25 lacs from Arshad Razak Sota @ Raju Dubai - accused No.4 through VP Angadia and paid Rs.17 lacs to Karim Md. Siraj - accused No.7 and Sunil Vithal Barmase - accused No.8 through Angadia at Bhuj. It also transpires that the appellant further received Rs.17 lacs from Hajisaab Page 10 of 13 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Thu Aug 21 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 21 22:33:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2197/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2025 undefined @ Bhaijaan - WA-4 through Hawala in Dubai while he was absconding.
10. It is also required to be noted that trial is in progress and almost 41 witnesses have been examined out of 146 witnesses and that PW 18 and PW 19 as well as PW 17 have deposed in favour of the prosecution and have also identified the present appellant.
11. We have also considered the decision in the case of Gurvinder Singh Vs State of Punjab rendered in Criminal Appeal No.704 of 2024 and considering seriousness of the offence, extent of ramification of the offence running across international boarder, well organized modus operandi and twin tests of section 37 of the NDPS Act if taken into consideration the facts of the present case, it would reveal that it would not stand on the anvil of twin tests of section 37 of the NDPS Act. The complicity of the present accused in the commission of crime surfaces from the material on record and the facts are sufficient enough to Page 11 of 13 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Thu Aug 21 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 21 22:33:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2197/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2025 undefined establish the offence alleged against the present appellant. The charge is already framed, trial is in progress, elaborate examination of the evidences though not required, however, as stated above, strong prima facie case against the present appellant - accused No.11 is made out on the broad probabilities as put forward by the investigating agency. The analysis of the chargesheet as it is as a whole if considered and considering the nature of offences, number of accused remaining absconding including primary foreign conspirator, the appellant - accused No.11 being brought after efforts of NIA issuing look out notice cannot be over looked in evaluating possibility of flight risk of the appellant, tampering of the evidence cannot be ruled out in view of the FIR of threat to the witnesses being registered, we cannot ignore the fact that still number of witnesses remained to be examined and the trial is underway and will take at least some time in completion. However, when the appellant is facing serious charges having grave societal ramification in cross boarder drugs traffiking in organized manner at the cost of the public health cannot be taken lightly and cannot Page 12 of 13 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Thu Aug 21 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 21 22:33:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2197/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2025 undefined be treated as a routine NDPS case violation.
12. Under the circumstances, we are not inclined to enlarge the appellant - accused No.11 on regular bail. The appeal, therefore, deserves to be dismissed and accordingly, it is dismissed. Rule is discharged.
(ILESH J. VORA,J) (P. M. RAVAL, J) H.M. PATHAN Page 13 of 13 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Thu Aug 21 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 21 22:33:19 IST 2025