loader image

Bombay HC Grants Anticipatory Bail to NDPS Accused as Case Rests Solely on Statement of Co-Accused and Not Conscious Possession of Contraband Ganja

Bombay HC Grants Anticipatory Bail to NDPS Accused as Case Rests Solely on Statement of Co-Accused and Not Conscious Possession of Contraband Ganja

Akram Ajij Bagwan v. State of Maharashtra [Decided on 29-06-2026]

NDPS anticipatory bail ruling

In a couple of anticipatory bail applications filed before the Bombay High Court regarding a First Information Report (FIR) dated 19-02-2024 against offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii), 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act), a Single Judge Bench of Justice Mehroz K. Pathan granted anticipatory bail to the applicants.

Upon receiving information, the police authorities conducted a raid and arrested two accused persons along with 459 kg of contraband ganja. During their interrogation, names of other accused persons including the present applicants, were revealed. It was also disclosed that the seized contraband was to be supplied to the applicants. The applicants submitted that they were arraigned as accused persons in the said FIR based only upon the statement of the co-accused, which was specifically prohibited in view of the Supreme Court’s judgment.

The Court perused the arrested persons’ statements and found that there was no other connecting evidence to link the present applicants with the said crime as there was no phone call records except for one call between one of the present applicants and the arrested accused. It was stated that the applicants were not found in conscious possession of the contraband ganja. Hence, the Court found that the applicants were prima facie not involved in the present offence and since they did not have any criminal antecedents, they were not likely to indulge in a similar offence if released on bail. It was stated that the twin conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act stood satisfied.

ALSO READ: Madras HC: Two-Wheeler Bundled Insurance Policy Covers Pillion Rider; Insurer Cannot Avoid Liability

Referring to the Supreme Court’s decision in Toofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu (2021) 4 SCC 1 and after considering that the only material relied upon by the prosecution was a statement of a co-accused, the Court was inclined to protect the present applicants. Thus, the Court directed the applicants to be released upon arrest by furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- each with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount. The anticipatory bail was granted on the condition that the applicants would report to the I.O. every Friday and Saturday till the filing of the charge sheet and thereafter, once in two months till framing of charge.

Other conditions included the applicants being cooperative with the investigation, refraining from tampering with the prosecution evidence, and submission of their Aadhar and PAN Card to the I.O. Thus, the applications were disposed of.

Appearances

For Applicants – Mr. Atharva R. Bhingardeve, Mr. Sumit Patil, Mr. Onkar Tole, Mr. Akash Ghare, Mr. Jivan Jadhav

For Respondents – Mr. Nitin B. Patil (APP), Mr. S.V. Gavand (APP)

PDF Icon

Akram Ajij Bagwan v. State of Maharashtra

Preview PDF