Gujarat High Court
Piyush Babubhai Aslaliya vs State Of Gujarat on 19 September, 2025
Author: A.Y. Kogje
Bench: A.Y. Kogje
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/15636/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL -
AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 15636 of 2025
================================================================
PIYUSH BABUBHAI ASLALIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
================================================================
Appearance:
MR ZUBIN BHARADA with MR. KISHAN H DAIYA(6929) for the Applicant(s)
No. 1
MS ASMITA PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
Date : 19/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present successive regular bail application is filed under Section 483 of BNSS in connection with FIR bearing No.B- 11210015200082 of 2020 registered with DCB Police Station, Surat City for offence under Sections 8(C), 22(C) and 29 of the NDPS Act.
2. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that the applicant is aged 31 years and is in jail since 04.11.2020. It is submitted that considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.
2.1 It is submitted that pursuant to registration of the FIR, now charge sheet is also filed long back. It is submitted that Page 1 of 9 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Wed Sep 24 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 24 21:50:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15636/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/09/2025 undefined looking to the charge sheet papers, it has come on record that the applicant has no connection with the MD drug found from the conscious possession of other co-accused and at the time of arrest of the main accused, the applicant was not named in the complaint. It is submitted that it is only on the basis of statement of co- accused that the applicant came to be arraigned as accused having role of manufacturer of MD drug, but there is no evidence worth the name supporting such allegation.
2.3 It is submitted that the petitioner has completed his studies in MCA and has no knowledge of pharmaceuticals. The applicant is no way involved in manufacturing activity of MD drug and at the best, he can be said to have acted as delivery man. 2.4 It is submitted that the applicant is young man and having responsibility of his family and is the only earning member of the family and if the applicant will not be released on bail, it will be hard for his family to survive.
2.5 It is submitted that the petitioner is alleged to be supplier of drugs to co-accused and therefore, rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act will not apply.
2.6 It is submitted that out of total 19 accused cited in the charge sheet, 14 accused are already released on regular bail by the Apex Court and this Court and therefore, on the ground of Page 2 of 9 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Wed Sep 24 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 24 21:50:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15636/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/09/2025 undefined parity also, case of the applicant deserves consideration.
3. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent- State has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence.
3.1 It is submitted that the applicant is involved in serious offences under the NDPS Act and on the same day, two separate FIRs for offences under the NDPS Act are registered against the present applicant. The case involves MD drugs weighing 1011.82 grams.
3.2 It is submitted that the role of the applicant is not only that of a supplier, but in fact, he was also the manufacturer of MD drug. The quantity involved is also commercial quantity. 3.2 It is submitted that now the proceedings have culminated into Special NDPS Case No.4 of of 2021, and Special NDPS Case No.15 of 20921, which are going on and many witnesses have already been examined and cross-examined and therefore, presence of the applicant would be necessary in conducting trial.
4. Having heard learned Advocates for the parties and having perused documents, it appears that the present is the fifth successive regular bail application by the applicant after previous Page 3 of 9 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Wed Sep 24 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 24 21:50:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15636/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/09/2025 undefined four were withdrawn by the applicant, details of which are as under:-
Sr. No. No. of CRMA Status Order date
1 CRMA Withdrawn 23.11.2021
No.12184 of
2021
2 CRMA Withdrawn 15.07.2022
No.11045 of
2022
3. CRMA No.5640 Withdrawn 03.05.2024
of 2024
4. CRMA Withdrawn 13.09.2024
No.13453 of
2024
5. It also appears that the offence is committed in a manner, the present applicant along with co-accused-Sanket Aslaliya (cousin brother) in custody and Pragnesh Thummar thought about producing MD Drugs out of chemicals and discussed with each other that the business would be highly lucrative in monetary terms. They used internet search engines, i.e. Google, Wikipedia etc., for 'Mephedrone synthesis', and obtained information as to which chemicals are to be used in how much quantity, the mixture is to be heated up to what temperature, what equipments are required etc. As co-accused-Jigarbhai used to manufacture Rubber Polymers and the laboratory equipments were available there, co-accused-Pragnesh Thummar told him that they were looking for a space for production of a drug (Bisoprolol Page 4 of 9 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Wed Sep 24 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 24 21:50:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15636/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/09/2025 undefined Fumarate) used for treating a heart disease and succeeded in getting the space, where they undertook the production of MD Drug on trial basis. As various chemicals were needed to produce Mephedrone drug, Shivkrupa Chemical at Pandesara and Venus Chemical at Unn were approached. As Bromine was needed for the production, co-accused-Pragnesh Thummar obtained the chemical from Sigma Chemical, Sachin and began the trial where he worked for about five to six hours continuously for about three days. In the first process, total three chemicals are mixed in a flask by muddling them for two hours. In the second process, the mixture is heated on a furnace to collect its evaporation in a beaker. In the third process, the evaporation material collected in the second process is mixed with two chemicals namely Toluene Solvent and Methylamine. Thereafter, the mixture is muddled in a flask for twenty four hours. The material derived from the process is when mixed with a low intensity acid, the main material (drug) is obtained in liquid form in the fluid containing acid. Thus, through this process, he succeeded in trial of making MD Drug. 5.1 Co-accused-Pragnesh Thummar also taught the method of producing Mephedrone Drug to co-accused-Sanket Aslaliya. Co- accused-Sanket Aslaliya kept with him about Rs.1 lakh and handed over the remaining proceed to co-acused-Pragnesh Thummar, out of which, Pragnesh Thummar made payments of about a quarter Page 5 of 9 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Wed Sep 24 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 24 21:50:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15636/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/09/2025 undefined and a lakh rupees against the Chemical bills. As Pragnesh Thummar and Piyush used to visit Panoli and Indore, he had incurred an expense of about Rupees 50 Thousand. Apart from that, about forty to fifty lakh were kept by him for his own expenses and some of the money was given to the present applicant for his expenses. In February 2020, the present applicant and co-accused- Pragensh Pravinbhai Thummar began to purchase necessary equipment to install a drug factory at Indore. At about five in the evening on 18/09/2020, co-accused-Sanket Aslaliya went to Flat No. 502, Shilpvila Appartment, Dumas on the motor cycle of the present applicant, where he handed the cover over to the witness Gyanvi d/o. Shambhugiri Bhikhangiri Goswami at the instance of Mohammad Salman alias Aman Zaveri who collected it later. On the next day, when Mohammad Salman alias Aman Zaveri handed over Rs.1,76,000/- in cash to Sanket Aslaliya, first he made a payment of Rupees fifty thousand to the chemical suppliers. As 20 th August 2020 was birthday of the present applicant and as Pragnesh Thummar had not given him any gift, he gave Rs.50,000/- in cash to his cousin, witness-Vivek Sureshbhai Zalavadiya, who in turn remitted Rs.50,000/- to Sanket Aslaliya in his bank account no. 9913811802 held with Kotak Mahindra Bank through Online Banking Transaction No. UPI/vivek 881996/023914622139/pt. Thereafter, Sanket Aslaliya ordered a mobile phone of Asus make, to be delivered at his office address, which was later collected by Page 6 of 9 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Wed Sep 24 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 24 21:50:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15636/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/09/2025 undefined the present applicant.
5.2 During raid, the quantity of MD. Drug in form of white colored powder weighing 446.010 grams and valuing at Rs.44,60,100/- in international market, which was sold to Mohammad Salman alias Aman Zaveri by the accused Pragnesh Thummar, Sanket Aslaliya and the present applicant along with the quantity of MD Drug in off-white colored powder form weighing 38.830 grams and valuing at Rs.3,88,300/- in international market as well as the quantity of MD Drug in form of light brown colored powder weighing 67.910 grams and valuing at Rs.6,79,100/- in international market, which was sold to Mohammad Salman alias Aman Zaveri by Sanket Aslaliya during the Lock-Down, as well as 85.840 grams of MD Drug powder of greenish gray color containing moisture and valuing at Rs.8,58,400/- in international market, have been recovered from the accused Mohammad Salman alias Aman Zaveri. Total 44 phone calls between two mobile numbers of co-accused and 42 phone calls between mobile numbers of the present applicant and other co-accused-Mohammad Salman alias Aman Zaveri have taken place. Total 1618 phone calls took place between the present applicant and accused Pragnesh Thummar. The number of phone calls between the present applicant and co-accused-Pratik Brahmbhatt are 02, whereas, 01 phone call took place between the present applicant Page 7 of 9 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Wed Sep 24 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 24 21:50:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15636/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/09/2025 undefined co-accused Pratik Brahmbhatt.
6. Thus, the CDR, which is now part of investigation also indicates consistent connect between the applicant and the co- accused as aforesaid. Thus, it clearly appears that the present applicant has played key role in commission of the offence.
7. The offence is seems to be an organized crime, where each of the accused have played role which has come on record during the course of investigation and filing of charge sheet. The specific role attributed to the applicant is that of a manufacturer.
8. So far as parity is concerned, the Court has perused the role played by co-accused persons as compared to the present applicant. The present applicant appears to be the manufacturer of the MD drug, whereas other co-accused persons either were supplier or consumers of the MD drug themselves.
9. The Court has perused the order of the Sessions Court, wherein role of the applicant is discussed and while cogent and convincing reasons are given while rejecting the bail application of the present applicant.
10. The Court has also taken into consideration the gross facts of the case and sheer magnitude of the offence and the extensive consequences of the same on the society at large. Page 8 of 9 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Wed Sep 24 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 24 21:50:58 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/15636/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/09/2025 undefined
11. It would be appropriate to give due regards to the submissions made by the learned APP bringing of notice of the Court the grim situation that is prevailing, especially in the State of Gujarat where offences under the provision of NDPS Act dealing with the drugs like 'Ganja', Charas', 'Mephadrone' and 'Amphetamine' are on huge increase and the action is taken by the Government Agency to deter the use from indulging into the activities related to drugs which include the drug dealing, drug peddling and drug consuming.
12. The applicant being one of the manufacturers and that too quantity involved is commercial quantity, therefore rigours of Section 37 are clearly attracted. There is nothing on record or argued to take the case out of the rigours. Moreover, accused is also charge sheeted for another offence being CR No.B- 11210015200084 of 2020 registered with DCB Police Station, Surat of similar nature.
13. In view of the aforesaid, the Court is not inclined to exercise discretion in favour of the applicant. The application therefore deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. Rule is discharged.
(A.Y. KOGJE, J) SHITOLE Page 9 of 9 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Wed Sep 24 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 24 21:50:58 IST 2025