Mumbai: NDPS Court Bail granted to 32-year-old man arrested on Wednesday 2021 narcotics caseFollowing the argument of his counsel, the agency arrested him only on the ground that he was present at the place from where the commercial quantity was seized and argued that he was present only in the capacity of the driver of the prime accused.
NDPS special court granted bail Sahab Ali Hanif Mulla (32) Those who were arrested with Zakir Rahman Sheikhi by alias petriwala Narcotic Control Bureau (NCB) in February 2021. The court directed Sahab to be released on execution of a personal bond of Rs 50,000.
The agency had seized 200 bottles of codeine syrup, 460 grams of ganja and 56 grams of mephedrone and 2.5 grams of charas under the provisions of the NDPS Act. In a follow-up action, the agency raided a location in Govandi and arrested Milind Barddi and recovered 1.1 kg of cannabis and 200 grams of nitrazepam, a psychotropic substance. Advocate Sana Raees argued that his client is seeking bail on the ground that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case.
He was the driver of accused number 1 Zakir Sheikh and no banned substance has been seized from the applicant. The applicant was not present in the premises at the time of alleged raid. The applicant had no knowledge about the presence of prohibited material in the premises and has been falsely implicated and willfully dragged. The applicant was present immediately outside the car and in the capacity of the driver and in the present case he has been held liable as he had no criminal role.
“On inspection of the documents, it is revealed that when the spot was raided, 4 people including accused number 1 and 2 and one Irfan Shaikh and Mohammad Rehan were found.
The prosecution has not been implicated, said Irfan Sheikh and Mohd. Rehan is an accused but has been made a witness. His statement u/s. There are 67 records of the NDPS Act which have been filed on pages 21 and 23 of the chargesheet. As indicated by ld . The applicant’s lawyer, witness Irfan Shaikh in his statement said that Zakir Shaikh (accused no. 1) and Sahab Ali (accused no. 2) were drinking charas while the witness Mohd. Rehan said in his statement that we were all drinking charas. It is argued that if the witnesses were also consuming charas according to their own statements, why were they not charged. Hence the prosecution case is doubtful and cannot be relied upon. It is also submitted that the contradictory statements of the witnesses cannot be relied upon,” the court remarked.
The prosecution claimed that the present applicant was carrying on the business of illegal drug trafficking with the accused No. 1 and the applicant was helping the accused No. 1 in the said business and hence, Section 29 of the NDPS Act is invoked. I am of the opinion that in a role case each accused is different and the ground of equality does not apply. However, in so far as the present applicant is concerned, as discussed above, there is no prima facie material evidence to show his involvement in the commission of an offense in respect of the prohibited material in commercial quantities. Hence, stiffness U/sec. 37 of the NDPS Act is not attracted to this matter. There is no allegation and evidence against the present applicant regarding the financing of illegal smuggling. Therefore sec. 27-A of the NDPS Act is prima facie not applicable to the applicant.
FacebookTwitterinstagramKu APPyoutube