Mumbai, Maharashtra – July 7, 2022 – Ajim Atiq Sayed, accused No. 1 in a case involving the possession of Ganja, has been denied bail by the Special Court for Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985, at Greater Bombay. Additional Sessions Judge V.G. Raghuwanshi (C.R. 43) rejected Criminal Bail Application No. 1135 of 2022, related to C.R. No. 90 of 2022.

Sayed was arrested by the Anti-Narcotics Cell (ANC) of Azad Maidan Unit and charged under Section 8(c) read with Sections 20 and 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985, for allegedly possessing Ganja.

Case Background:

The prosecution alleged that on April 30, 2022, police officers on patrol apprehended Sayed and accused No. 2, seizing 10 kg of Ganja (5 kg from each). During the investigation, the accused revealed the name of accused No. 3, Ganesh Prakash Golesir, from whom more than 61 kg of Ganja was recovered.

Arguments and Court’s Reasoning:

Sayed’s counsel argued that the quantity of Ganja seized from each accused individually was less than the commercial quantity, thus not attracting Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which imposes stringent bail conditions. They cited a previous judgment, Sangeeta Y. Gaikwad vs. The State of Maharashtra, where bail was granted despite the recovery of 280 grams of heroin.

The prosecution countered that the case involved a conspiracy, as Sayed’s information led to the arrest of accused No. 3 and the recovery of a substantial quantity of Ganja. They argued that the total contraband recovered exceeded the commercial quantity, making Section 37 applicable. They also emphasized the seriousness of the offense and its societal impact, citing precedents like Union of India vs. Ram Samujh and Anr. and Rhea Chakraborty vs. Union of India.

The court agreed with the prosecution’s argument regarding the conspiracy. “But one thing is clear that, on information given by the applicant/accused, accused No.3 was arrested and there is an independent evidence to show that, he was also indulging in such activity. This is also conspiracy to sale Ganja and therefore, total amount of Ganja seized is more than commercial quantity and section 37 of the NDPS Act will be attracted in this case,” Judge Raghuwanshi stated.

The court further noted, “At this stage there is no material on record to believe that, applicant/accused is not guilty of such offence and he will not commit any offence while on bail and therefore, this is not a fit case to exercise discretion in favour of the applicant/accused.”

Decision:

Judge Raghuwanshi rejected Sayed’s bail application, concluding that the total quantity of Ganja recovered, including that from accused No. 3, exceeded the commercial quantity, and Section 37 of the NDPS Act was applicable.

The certified copy of the judgment was issued on July 7, 2022. This decision highlights the court’s consideration of the overall quantity of contraband recovered and the alleged conspiracy when deciding bail applications under the stringent provisions of the NDPS Act.