IN THE COURT OF THE SPECIAL JUDGE FOR N.D.P.S. CASES
AT GREATER MUMBAI
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 829 OF 2022
IN
C. R. NO. 26 OF 2022
Ajay Shaligram Nikam
Age : 34 yrs.,
R/o : Pipe Line, R. No. 739,
Vatsalt Naik Nagar,
S. G. Barve Marg,
Chembur (E), Mumbai.
…Applicant
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra
ANC, Ghatkopar unit
…Respondent
Appearance :Mr. Jitendra S., Adv. for applicant/accused.
Mr. Rajput, APP for respondent/State.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR THE SPECIAL JUDGE
V. V. PATIL (C.R. NO. 44).
DATE
: 29th April, 2022
ORDER
The applicant/accused Ajay Shaligram Nikam has moved present
application for bail u/sec. 439 of Cr.P.C., who was arrested on
01.04.2022 by officers of ANC, Ghatkopar Unit in C.R. No. 26/2022 for
offence punishable u/sec. 8(c) r/w 20 & 29 of NDPS Act, 1985.
2.

As per case of the prosecution, on 01.04.2022, while police
personnel of the Respondent were on patrolling duty at a bus stop
behind PWD Garden, Chedanagar, Chembur, Mumbai they found 2
persons in suspicious condition. Hence, panchas were called and they
were apprehended. Their search was taken, wherein 7 kgs. of Ganja
was found in possession of the present applicant/accused no.1 and 11
kgs. of Ganja was found in possession of accused no.2. Said contraband
came to be seized under panchanama by following necessary procedure
and applicants were placed under arrest.

-2-
3.

The present applicant/accused has sought bail on the grounds
that he is innocent and falsely implicated in this case. The contraband
allegedly recovered from applicant falls under non-commercial quantity.
Hence rigors of Sec. 37 of NDPS Act are not applicable. The applicant is
permanent resident of Mumbai and is not likely to abscond. He
undertakes to abide by any condition imposed by the Court. Hence he
prayed for releasing him on bail.
4.

Application is opposed by respondent by filing say. It is contended
that during search, present accused was found in possession of 7 kgs. of
Ganja and accused no.2 was found in possession of 11 kgs. of Ganja.
Investigation is still going on. Applicant is habitual offender and there
are five cases registered against him including one case under
provisions of NDPS Act. If accused is released on bail he may not be
available for trial and he may indulge in same kind of offence. Hence
application be rejected.
5.

Perused application and say. Heard both sides. Perusal of record
reveals that whilst on patrolling duty, officers of ANC, Ghatkopar Unit
apprehended applicant/accused with possession of 7 kgs. of Ganja and
accused no.2 with 11 Kgs. of Ganja, which came to be seized under
panchanama. Now, the quantity of contraband
recovered from the
applicant is non-commercial quantity. Hence stringent provisions of
Sec. 37 of NDPS Act are not applicable.
6.

Prosecution opposed the application on the ground that applicant
is habitual offender and there are five cases , one under NDPS Act and
four under IPC registered against the applicant and if he is granted
bail, he may commit similar offence.

However,
it is submitted on
behalf of applicant that he is not convicted for any offence. This fact is
-3-
not disputed by Ld. APP during course of argument. Hence I am of the
opinion that applicant cannot be denied bail merely because some cases
are registered against him, if otherwise he is entitled to be released on
bail.
7.

As stated above, the seized quantity of Ganja seized from the
applicant falls under intermediate quantity and rigors of Sec. 37 of
NDPS Act are not applicable. Now, already recovery is completed and
nothing is remained to be recovered. Further more, applicant has a
permanent address in the Mumbai and he is not likely to abscond.
8.

Further, applicant is ready to abide by any condition imposed by
the Court. No purpose will be served by keeping the applicant in the
custody. Hence I hold that application deserves to be allowed and
applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Hence I proceed to pass
following order :
ORDER
1. Bail Application no. 829/2022 is hereby allowed.
2. Applicant/accused Ajay Shaligram Nikam be released in C.R. No.
26/2022 on executing P. R. Bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rs. Thirty Thousand
only) with one or two sureties in the like amount.
3. Applicant/accused to attend the office of ANC, Ghatkopar unit on
every Friday between 2.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m. till filing of charge-sheet.
4. Applicant/accused and his sureties shall provide their respective
mobile
numbers
and
correct
address
of
residence
alongwith names of two relatives with their mobile numbers and
addresses.
5. Applicant/accused shall produce the proof of his identity and
proof of residence at the time of executing the bail bond.
6.
Applicant/accused
shall
not
tamper
with
prosecution
witnesses/evidence in any manner and co-operate in early disposal of
trial.

-4-
7. Applicant/accused shall not commit similar offence while on
bail.
8. Ld. Advocate for applicant/accused prayed for allowing
provisional cash bail for period of eight weeks. Hence, permission
granted to furnish provisional cash bail of Rs. 30,000/- for period of
eight weeks.
9. Accordingly, Bail Application no. 829/2022 is disposed off.

Date : 29.04.2022
Dictated on
: 29.04.2022
Transcribed on : 29.04.2022
Signed on
: 29.04.2022
(V. V. PATIL)
Special Judge (N.D.P.S.),
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Mumbai.

-5-
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGEMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE
29.4.2022
TIME
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
11.30 a.m.

Mrs. S. W. Tuscano
Name of the Judge
HHJ Shri V. V. Patil
(CR No.44)
Date of Pronouncement of
Judgment/Order.
Judgment/order signed by P.O on
Judgment/order uploaded on
26.04.2022
26.04.2022
29.04.2022
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGEMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE
30.04.2022
TIME
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
11.30 a.m.

Mrs. S. W. Tuscano
Name of the Judge
HHJ Shri V. V. Patil
(CR No.44)
Date of Pronouncement of
Judgment/Order.
Judgment/order signed by P.O on
Judgment/order uploaded on
29.04.2022
29.04.2022
30.04.2022