Gujarat High Court
Nadeem Sheikh Najirbhai Sheikh vs State Of Gujarat on 1 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/4179/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE
CHARGESHEET) NO.4179 of 2025
==========================================================
NADEEM SHEIKH NAJIRBHAI SHEIKH
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ANIQ A KADRI(11256) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HARSHEEL D SHUKLA(6158) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR. DHAWAN JAYSWAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
Date : 01/08/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The applicant has filed this application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for enlarging the applicant on regular bail in connection with FIR being NCB/AZU/CR-14/2023 registered with N.C.B. Ahmedabad Zonal Unit.
2. Heard learned Advocate appearing for the applicant. He submitted that the applicant has been arrested in connection with the present offence on 02.08.2024. Thereafter, the investigation of the offence is over and charge-sheet has been filed. As per the case of prosecution, a secret information has received by the Prosecuting Agency about the applicant being in possession of the Page 1 of 6 Uploaded by RAVI SATISHKUMAR OZA(HCW0111) on Mon Aug 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 04 22:10:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/4179/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/08/2025 undefined contraband substance of Methamphetamine worth 211 grams. On the basis of the said secret information, the Prosecuting Agency had carried out raid and as per the case of prosecution, the applicant was found in possession of the contraband substance Methamphetamine worth 211 grams. Thereafter, the FSL Officer was also called at the place for examination of the substance found from the present applicant and as per the report submitted by the said FSL Officer also, the substance which was found from the possession of the present applicant, was Methamphetamine. However, subsequently when the samples of the substance were sent to FSL for examination, as per the report submitted by the National Forensic Sciences University on 14.12.2023, the samples were found positive for Mephedrone. Thus, it was clear case on the part of the prosecution that the substance which was found from the possession of the applicant was Methamphetamine, however as per the report of the FSL, it was Mephedrone. This indicates that the samples which were collected from the substance which was recovered from the possession of the applicant, were not duly preserved and the possibility of some mischief having been played with them also cannot be ruled out. Under these circumstances, there is no possibility of the applicant being convicted in the present offence. He, therefore, submitted to allow the present application and enlarge the applicant on bail subject to suitable conditions. He has further submitted that the applicant has good Page 2 of 6 Uploaded by RAVI SATISHKUMAR OZA(HCW0111) on Mon Aug 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 04 22:10:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/4179/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/08/2025 undefined reputation in the society and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in Jail for indefinite period. It is further contended that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions that may be imposed by this Court if released on bail.
3. Learned Advocate Mr. Harsheel D. Shukla appearing for the respondent - NCB has opposed the present application contending that the FSL Officer who had examined the substance at the spot, had given his preliminary opinion about the substance being Methamphetamine. However, the FSL druing the scientific examination of the said substance, had found it to be Mephedrone. In any case, the fact remains that the applicant was found in conscious possession of the contraband substance. He also submitted that the same quantity has been prescribed to be commercial quantity of the contraband substance of Methamphetamine as well as Mephedrone, and therefore, the quantity of the contraband substance which was recovered from the present applicant, was commercial quantity and hence, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would apply to the facts of the present case. He, therefore, submitted to dismiss the present application.
4. Learned APP appearing for the respondent-State has also opposed the present application and has submitted that looking to Page 3 of 6 Uploaded by RAVI SATISHKUMAR OZA(HCW0111) on Mon Aug 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 04 22:10:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/4179/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/08/2025 undefined the nature of offence, this Court may not exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant and the application may be dismissed.
5. Heard learned Advocates for the parties and perused the record. From the record, it appears that one Krishn Mohan Prasad, Sub Inspector, NCB, Ahmedabad had received a specific information on 10.11.2023 that one Shaikh Mohammed Sohail Kadar and Nadeem Shaikh (applicant) were traveling from Mumbai to Ahmedabad by Gujarat Express train and they were secretly transporting about 400 to 500 grams of Methamphetamine. On the basis of the said secret information received, a watch was arranged by the respondent-NCB at Platform No.6 of the Ahmedabad Railway Station and both the aforesaid persons were intercepted by the authorities as they disembarked from the train and upon their personal examination, it was found that they had concealed contraband substance in their undergarments. The quantity of the contraband substance recovered from the present applicant was 211 grams. As per the record, the raiding authority had also summoned the FSL Officer to the place for examination of the substance found from the present applicant as well as other co-accused and after examination, the substance was reported to be Methamphetamine. The samples collected from the said contraband substance were also sent to the FSL for scientific examination and the report of the FSL certifies Page 4 of 6 Uploaded by RAVI SATISHKUMAR OZA(HCW0111) on Mon Aug 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 04 22:10:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/4179/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/08/2025 undefined the substance to be Mephedrone and not Methamphetamine. Be that as it may, at this stage, the fact remains that the present applicant was found in conscious possession of the contraband substance and for Methamphetamine as well as Mephedrone, the quantity over and above 50 grams is prescribed to be the commercial quantity. Thus, the applicant was found in conscious possession of the contraband subsequently which was commercial quantity, and therefore, the rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act would come into play.
6. It is sought to be contended on behalf of the applicant that when upon examination of the substance by the FSL Officer on the spot, had certified it to be Methamphetamine and the FSL, subsequently certified it to be Mephedrone, indicates that the samples may have mishandled or some mischief may have play with it. As discussed hereinabove, whatever the substance be, either Mephedrone or Methamphetamine, both are the prohibited substances and at this stage, it is the position that the applicant was found in possession of the contraband substance. The examination which was done by the FSL on the spot, was not the final examination, and therefore, even after him having certified the substance to be Methamphetamine, it was sent to FSL for scientific examination where it was reported to be Mephedrone. At this stage, the possibility of some error having crept in at the time Page 5 of 6 Uploaded by RAVI SATISHKUMAR OZA(HCW0111) on Mon Aug 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 04 22:10:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/4179/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/08/2025 undefined of examination of the substance by the FSL Officer on the spot, cannot be ruled out. The aspect as regards the samples having been mishandled or any mischief having taken place with it, is required to be taken into consideration during the course of trial at the stage of appreciation of evidence before the Trial Court. It is not for this Court at this stage to record a finding to the effect that though samples were mishandled and some mischief had taken place with it. Having regard to these aspects, no case is made out. Hence, the present application is dismissed. Notice discharged.
(M. R. MENGDEY,J) RAVI OZA Page 6 of 6 Uploaded by RAVI SATISHKUMAR OZA(HCW0111) on Mon Aug 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Aug 04 22:10:19 IST 2025