Delhi High Court - Orders
Chiemezie James vs State Through Sho Ps Nihal Vihar on 13 January, 2026
Author: Swarana Kanta Sharma
Bench: Swarana Kanta Sharma
$~9
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 2771/2025
CHIEMEZIE JAMES .....Petitioner
Through: Ms. Shahina Parveen, Advocate
versus
STATE THROUGH SHO PS NIHAL VIHAR .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Manoj Pant, APP for the State
with SI Ashok Singh Chauhan
CORAM:
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
ORDER
% 13.01.2026
1. By way of the instant application, the applicant seeks grant of regular bail in case arising out of FIR bearing No. 401/2024, registered at Police Station Nihal Vihar, New Delhi for the commission of offence punishable under Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereafter 'NDPS Act').
2. Brief facts of the present case, as per prosecution, are that on 18.03.2024, HC Rajesh had received secret information regarding supply of Amphetamine by a person of African origin in the area of Chander Vihar, Nihal Vihar, Delhi. The said information was reduced into writing, entered in the daily diary, and placed before the senior officers, pursuant to which directions were issued to conduct a raid in terms of Section 42 of the NDPS Act. Thereafter, a raiding team was constituted, and the team proceeded to the spot along with the informer. Efforts were made to join public witnesses, This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/01/2026 at 20:40:45 however, none agreed to participate. At about 06:40 PM, the accused Chiemezie James was seen at the indicated location and was identified by the informer. The accused was apprehended at around 06:45 PM. The accused was informed of his rights under Section 50 of the NDPS Act, which were explained to him in English, and he declined to be searched in the presence of a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer. Upon search, a polythene packet containing a crystal-like substance was recovered from the right pocket of his jeans. The substance, on field testing, was found to be Amphetamine, and its total weight was found to be 60 grams. The recovered contraband was duly sealed at the spot, seizure memo was prepared, and the accused was handed over to the Investigating Officer. The accused was formally arrested on 19.03.2024, and further investigation was carried out. Sampling proceedings were conducted before the learned Magistrate under Section 52A of the NDPS Act, and the samples were later sent to FSL, Rohini, which confirmed the substance to be Methamphetamine. Upon completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was filed, and a supplementary charge-sheet along with the FSL report was also placed on record.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant argues that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and has no connection with the alleged offence. It is argued that the applicant was arrested on 19.03.2024 and has remained in judicial custody since then, and that the allegation has been made largely on the basis of his previous involvement in another case. It is further submitted that the search and seizure were conducted without joining any independent public witness, and there is no CCTV footage, photograph or videography to support the alleged recovery. The learned counsel also contends that the mandatory safeguards This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/01/2026 at 20:40:45 under the NDPS Act have not been complied with, including non- verification of the inventory by the Court, non-compliance of Section 52A, and delay in sending the samples to the FSL without any explanation. It is further argued that the applicant does not understand English, yet the notice under Section 50 NDPS Act and other documents were served in English. Lastly, it is submitted that the investigation stands completed, the trial is likely to take considerable time, and continued incarceration of the applicant would amount to a violation of his right to speedy trial under Article 21. It is therefore prayed that the applicant be granted bail.
4. The learned APP for the State has strongly opposes the bail application, and argues that the applicant was apprehended on the basis of specific secret information, and commercial quantity of psychotropic substance was recovered from his possession, which stands confirmed by the FSL report. It is further argued that the applicant is a foreign national and does not have permanent roots in India, which raises a serious flight risk. The learned APP also points out that the applicant is already involved in another NDPS case of similar nature, wherein he is presently on bail. Considering the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the seriousness of the offence, and the likelihood of the applicant indulging in similar activities if released, the learned APP prays that the bail application be dismissed.
5. This Court has heard arguments addressed on behalf of the applicant as well as the State, and has perused the material available on record.
6. At the outset, this Court notes that the applicant is facing trial for an offence punishable under Section 22(c) of the NDPS Act. As per the prosecution case, 60 grams of Amphetamine/Methamphetamine was recovered from the possession of the applicant. The said quantity is a This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/01/2026 at 20:40:45 commercial quantity, and therefore, the present case is hit by the statutory embargo contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
7. From the material placed on record, this Court finds that there is prima facie evidence indicating the involvement of the applicant in the alleged offence. The recovery was effected pursuant to specific secret information, which was duly reduced into writing and acted upon after informing the senior officers. The applicant was apprehended at the spot, and the contraband was recovered from his personal possession. The recovery was subjected to field testing at the spot, sealed as per procedure, and the FSL report has confirmed the substance to be Methamphetamine. At this stage, this Court does not find any material to hold that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the applicant is not guilty of the offence alleged.
8. As regards the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that there was non-compliance of Section 52A of the NDPS Act, this Court finds no merit in the said submission at this stage. The record shows that sampling proceedings were conducted before the learned Magistrate, and the inventory and samples were duly certified. Even otherwise, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narcotics Control Bureau v. Kashif: 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3848, has categorically held that any lapse or irregularity in compliance of Section 52A, by itself, does not vitiate the proceedings nor does it entitle the accused to bail. Such issues are matters of trial and evidence and cannot be conclusively examined at the stage of bail.
9. The other contentions raised on behalf of the applicant, including absence of independent public witnesses, or the language of the notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act, are also matters which require appreciation of This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/01/2026 at 20:40:45 evidence and cannot be gone into in detail at this stage. The record and the chargesheet placed before this Court prima facie reflects compliance with the statutory safeguards.
10. This Court also cannot lose sight of the fact that the applicant is involved in another case of similar nature, i.e. FIR No. 795/2022, registered at P.S. Kalyanpuri, Delhi, for offence under Section 22 of the NDPS Act, in which he is presently facing trial and is stated to be on bail. The said circumstance, at this stage, also weighs against the applicant. Further, the applicant is a foreign national and admittedly does not have any permanent residential address in India, and thus, the possibility of him evading the process of law, if released on bail, cannot be ruled out.
11. In view of the commercial quantity of psychotropic substance recovered from the applicant, the statutory bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, and the fact that testimonies of material witnesses are being recorded before the Trial Court, this Court is of the considered opinion that no ground for grant of bail is made out.
12. Accordingly, the bail application is dismissed.
13. It is, however, clarified that nothing expressed hereinabove shall tantamount to an expression of opinion on merits of the case.
14. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith.
DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J JANUARY 13, 2026/ns TD This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/01/2026 at 20:40:45