Cri. BA No.1159/2022
..1..

in NCB/MZU/C.R. No.13/2022
MHCC020063702022
Presented on
Registered on
Decided on
Duration
: 13-05-2022
: 13-05-20221
: 07-06-2022
: 0 months, 25 days
IN THE SPECIAL COURT FOR NARCOTIC DRUG AND
PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES ACT, 1985, AT GR. BOMBAY
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1159 OF 2022
IN
NCB/MZU/C.R. NO.13 OF 2022
Anuj Ajay Saxena
) .. Applicant/Accused
V/s.
Union of India, through
Nactotics Control Bureau, Mumbai
Zonal Unit, Mumbai C.R. No.13/2022 )
)
)
) .. Respondent/Prosecution
Appearance :
Ld. Adv. Mr. Lahane h/f Adv. Mahadik, for the applicant/accused.
Ld. APP Mr. S. S. Panjwani, for the respondent/prosecution.
CORAM : H.H. THE ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE
SHRI V.G. RAGHUWANSHI (C.R.43)
DATE : 07/06/2022
ORAL ORDER
Applicant/accused Anuj Ajay Saxena prays for releasing
him on bail. He submitted that, he was arrested on 07.05.2022 with
allegations that, 10 grams Cocaine was seized from a parcel addressed
Cri. BA No.1159/2022
to him.

..2..

in NCB/MZU/C.R. No.13/2022
NCB Mumbai Zonal Unit led a trap and seized 10 grams
Cocaine from the parcel addressed to him at the time of taking delivery
of said parcel.
2.

After his arrest he was produced before the Ld.

Metropolitan Magistrate 37th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai on 07.05.2022.
He was remanded custody of the NCB till 09.05.2022 and thereafter, he
is in judicial custody. He had moved an application for bail before Ld.
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 8th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai
it was turned down by Ld. ACMM on 10.05.2022.

Therefore, this
application.
3.

Applicant submits that, he is innocent. Allegedly, 10 grams
contraband was seized from him, it doesn’t fall under commercial
quantity. It is further alleged that, his statements were recorded under
section 67 of the NDPS Act, 1985. But in view of principles laid down
in Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, (2013) 16 SCC 31, statement
under section 67 of the NDPS Act has no evidentiary value, it is
inadmissible in evidence.
4.

Respondent submits that, as per allegations 10 packets of
contraband were found in the waist of jeans pant delivered to him by
courier company. There is nothing on record to show that applicant was
conscious about presence of this contraband. The jeans was sealed in a
packet delivered by courier company and therefore, it cannot be said
that, he was conscious about presence of contraband in such in that
packet. He relied upon “Mohan Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan” to canvas
that such possession cannot mean physical with animus.

Applicant
further submitted that, section 37 of the NDPS Act regulates grant of
Cri. BA No.1159/2022
..3..

in NCB/MZU/C.R. No.13/2022
bail involving offences under NDPS Act.

It was argued that, the
quantity seized from the applicant was not commercial quantity, Hence,
section 37 of the NDPS Act is not applicable in this case. Applicant is an
educated person from reputed family. He lost his job during Covid-19
pandemic.

Thereafter, he is suffering from mental illness and he is
under treatment. He is not likely to commit any offence. There are no
reasonable grounds to believe that he is guilty of this offence. He under
took abide by all the conditions. He is permanent residents of Mumbai.
He has roots in the society.

He will not abscond.

He prayed
accordingly.
5.

Prosecution resisted this application by say of Ld.

Additional Public Prosecutor on grounds mentioned therein.
6.

I have heard both sides. I have given thoughtful
consideration to submission of both sides. In this case applicant was
not found in possession of commercial quantity of Cocaine.

The
quantity of contraband seized from the applicant/accused was only 10
grams. NCB was granted custody of applicant/accused for investigation
of this offence. At present the applicant/accused is in judicial custody.
Therefore, NCB doesn’t need custody of the applicant/accused for
further investigation. In view of principles laid down in Union of India
Vs. Rattan Mallik, (2009) 2 SCC 624, this Court is not required to
record a finding of not guilty, but this Court is required to see whether
there was any reasonable ground for believing that, applicant/accused
is not guilty of the offences alleged against him.
allegations
against
the
applicant/accused
At this stage the
are
not
proved.

Applicant/accused is ready to abide by all conditions and he undertakes
not to flew away from the course of justice. In such circumstances, this
Cri. BA No.1159/2022
..4..

in NCB/MZU/C.R. No.13/2022
is a fit case to exercise discretion in favour of applicant. Hence, I pass
following order.
ORDER
1. Criminal
Bail
Application
No.1159/2022
in
NCB/MZU/C.R.

No.13/2022, is hereby allowed.
2. Applicant/accused Anuj Ajay Saxena, shall be released in
NCB/MZU/C.R. No.13/2022 on executing P. R. Bond of Rs.25,000/(Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only) with one or more solvent sureties
in the like amount, on following conditions.
3. Applicant/accused shall not indulge any activity which shall hamper
the course of investigation and he shall appear before Trial Court
regularly.
4. Applicant/accused shall not tamper with evidence of prosecution.
5. Applicant/accused shall appear before the Investigating Officer once in a
week till filing of charge-sheet.
6. Application stands disposed off accordingly.
(Pronounced in open Court)
Digitally signed
by VIJAY
GOVINDSINGH
VIJAY
GOVINDSINGH RAGHUWANSHI
RAGHUWANSHI Date:
2022.06.08
16:32:01 +0530
Date : 07/06/2022.

Dictated on
Typed on
Signed on
: 07/06/2022
: 07/06/2022
: 07/06/2022
(V.G. RAGHUWANSHI)
N.D.P.S Special Judge
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Bombay (CR.43)
Cri. BA No.1159/2022
..5..

in NCB/MZU/C.R. No.13/2022
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE
08.06.2022
TIME
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
04.30 p.m.

Sanjay Baliram Kaskar
(Stenographer Grade-I)
Name of the Judge
H.H.J. SHRI. V.G. RAGHUWANSHI
(C.R.No.43) NDPS Spl. Judge
Date of Pronouncement of
Judgment/Order.

07/06/2022
Judgment/order signed by P.O on
07/06/2022
Judgment/order uploaded on
08/06/2022