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 10, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Khan Abusufiyan Shakil Ahmed vs Union Of India And Anr on 2 November, 2023

Author: M. S. Karnik

Bench: M. S. Karnik

2023:BHC-AS:33264



                    Urmila Ingale                                    930-ba-884-23.doc


                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                              CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                BAIL APPLICATION NO. 884 OF 2023

                    KHAN ABUSUFIYAN SHAKIL AHMED                  ..APPLICANT
                         VS.
                    1. UNION OF INDIA
                    2.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA                   ..RESPONDENT


                    Mr. Dilip Mishra a/w Mr. Ayaz Khan, for the Applicant.
                    Ms. Manisha Jagtap, for Respondent No.1.
                    Ms. Rutuja Ambekar, APP for the State- Respondent No.2.


                                                CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J.

                                                DATE     : NOVEMBER 2, 2023
                    P.C. :

                    1.     Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned

                    counsel for the respondent no.1 and learned APP for the

                    State.

                    2.     This is an application for bail in respect of the ofence

                    punishable under sections 22(b), 27, 27A, 28, 29, 30 and 35

                    of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,

                    1985 (hereafter 'the NDPS Act' for short) registered vide

                    C.R. No. NCB/MZU/CR-73/2021 registered with Narcotic

                    Control Bureau, Mumbai Zonal Unit.

                    3.     The applicant is the accused no.3. The applicant was

                    arrested on 26/08/2021.

                                                                                  1/7
 Urmila Ingale                                  930-ba-884-23.doc


4.     The accused nos. 1 and 2 were initially arrested. The

accused no.1 was found with commercial quantity of

contraband Mephedrone (MD). The accused no. 2 was not

found in possession but according to prosecution, he was

actively involved in dealing in contraband.    The accused

no.4 and accused no. 5 are the accused from whom the

accused no.1 procured supply of contraband. The applicant

is the accused no.3. The accused no. 5 who is alleged to be

the mastermind of the cartel and is the main supplier of MD,

during the course of investigation, it was revealed that the

accused no.5 is doing MD trafcking business through one

of his main peddler namely Khan Abusufyan Shakil Ahmed

i.e. is the present applicant-accused no.3.   The house of

applicant was searched on 26/08/2021. From the person of

the applicant quantity of 10.2 grams of MD is recovered.

The same is an intermediate quantity.

5.     Learned counsel for the respondent no.1 Ms. Jagtap

opposed the application.     My attention is invited to the

afdavit-in-reply fled on behalf of the respondents.       It is

submitted that the applicant is a part of the chain and

involved in serious ofence including illicit drug trafcking.



                                                            2/7
 Urmila Ingale                                   930-ba-884-23.doc


It is submitted that the applicant has nexus with other co-

accused who are already arrested in the said C.R..         It is

submitted that commercial quantity of the contraband was

recovered from the other accused and therefore even the

applicant is concerned with the commercial quantity and

therefore the rigours of section 37 of NDPS Act will apply. It

is further submitted that      the applicant was found in

possession of contraband and it is the contention that the

applicant is involved in illicit drug trafcking.      Learned

counsel submitted that there are materials to indicate the

nexus and role of the applicant in the conspiracy of

fnancing, peddling, distribution, preparation, consumption,

dealing, procurement, transportation for the purposes of

narcotic drugs and psychotropic substance.      My attention

is invited to the criminal antecedents which the applicant

has in respect of similar ofence when he was found in

possession of non-commercial quantity. The applicant has

been enlarged on bail in that C.R.

6.     I have heard learned counsel. The accusation of the

prosecution is that the applicant and the accused no. 5 who

is mastermind of the cartel and is the main supplier of MD is



                                                             3/7
 Urmila Ingale                                            930-ba-884-23.doc


doing his MD trafcking business through one of his main

peddler i.e. the applicant.           The accused no.5 fled an

application for bail before the Special Court.           By an order

dated 21/06/2023, the accused no.5 has been enlarged on

bail. It will be pertinent to refer the relevant portion of the

order passed by the Special Court while enlarging the

accused no.5 on bail. Paragraphs 5 to 7 of the said order

read thus :

                "5. The counsel for the accused has taken the Court
                through the reply fling by the Intelligence Ofcers
                A.K. Singh. He has pointed out that in the reply
                except vague and general allegations that the
                applicant was dealing in narcotics, there is no
                specifc role attributed to the applicant. SPP for State
                has taken the Court through the complaint para 65 in
                particular in which it is mentioned that one of the co-
                accused Shariq Wali Sayed has stated that the
                applicant is a supplier of Mephedrone and that this
                Shariq Wali Sayed has sold 52 grams of Mephedrone
                to applicant Vijay Kumar Singh, an amount of
                Rs.78,000/- was paid to him through mobile number
                of the wife of the applicant. This role is conspicuously
                absent in the reply fled by the Intelligence Ofcer.
                The counsel for the accused has taken me through
                the statement of Shariq Wali Sayed at page 258 of
                the compilation as well as the statement at 278 of
                the compilation. In none of the statement there is
                mentioned of the name of the accused no.1. So also
                in the lists of documents there is no document which
                shows that any amount was transferred from the
                account of the wife of the applicant to any of the co-
                accused.
                6. On going through the charge-sheet, there is
                nothing on record in form of Whatsapp chat or any
                other documents to show that any of the accused
                was in contact with the applicant or that there was


                                                                      4/7
 Urmila Ingale                                            930-ba-884-23.doc


                any transferred of money either by the applicant or
                any transfer of money from the account of the wife of
                the applicant no.1 at the instance of the applicant.
                7. In such case there is no evidence which would
                prima facie show the involvement of the accused
                no.1. There are reasons to believe that the accused
                no.1 is not guilty of the ofences. Further, it is not the
                case of the Intelligence Ofcer that the accused is
                having any criminal antecedents. This would lead the
                Court to believe that if released on bail, he would not
                commit ofence of similar nature.䉼


7.     Except section 67 statement of the applicant, which

according to the learned counsel for the respondent no.1

demonstrates that the applicant is involved in these

activities, prima facie, there is no other material placed on

record to show his involvement with the other co-accused

who were found in possession of the commercial quantity of

contraband.        Furthermore, there is nothing on record to

show that order dated 21/06/2023 enlarging accused no.5

on bail has been challenged.             It appears that the order

dated 21/06/2023 passed by the Sessions Court has

attained fnality.         It is the prosecution's case that the

accused no.5 is the head of the cartel who is doing his

business through the present applicant.               As the accused

no.5 has been enlarged on bail, even the present applicant

can be enlarged on bail.            In any case, what is found in


                                                                      5/7
 Urmila Ingale                                   930-ba-884-23.doc


possession of the present applicant is an intermediate

quantity i.e. 10.2 grams of contraband MD. Though there is

criminal antecedent against the applicant where he was

found in possession of non-commercial quantity, that by

itself should not be a factor to deprive the applicant the

facility of bail in the facts and circumstances of the present

case. The applicant can be enlarged on bail by imposing

stringent conditions. Hence, the following order :-

                            ORDER

(a) The application is allowed.

(b) The applicant- Khan Abusufyan Shakil Ahmed in connection with C.R. No.NCB/MZU/CR-73/2021 registered with Narcotic Control Bureau, Mumbai Zonal Unit, shall be released on bail on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with one or more solvent sureties in the like amount.

(c) The applicant shall attend the investigating Ofcer of Narcotic Control Bureau, Mumbai Zonal Unit once in fortnight on every frst and third Tuesday of the month between 10.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m.

(d) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from 6/7 Urmila Ingale 930-ba-884-23.doc disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Ofcer. The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.

(e) On being released on bail, the applicant shall furnish his contact number and residential address to the Investigating Ofcer and shall keep him updated, in case there is any change.

(f) The applicant shall attend the trial regularly. The applicant shall co-operate with the trial Court and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments.

(g) The applicant shall not leave Mumbai, Mumbai Suburban District without permission of the trial Court till the trial concludes.

(h) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating ofcer.

8. The application is disposed of.

(M. S. KARNIK, J.) 7/7 Signed by: Urmila P. Ingale Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 02/11/2023 20:54:28