Mumbai, January 25, 2024 – The Special Court for the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act in Greater Bombay granted bail to Abdulla Mohammad Salim Malik, a 33-year-old resident of Antop Hill, Mumbai, who was accused of possessing an intermediate quantity of Mephedrone (MD). The bail was granted in connection with C.R. No. 901 of 2023, registered at the Vile Parle Police Station under Section 8(c) read with Section 22(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985.
Case Background
According to the prosecution, on December 25, 2023, Malik was allegedly found in possession of five grams of Mephedrone (MD), a synthetic stimulant classified as a controlled substance under the NDPS Act. Following the seizure, he was arrested and remained in custody until the court’s decision on his bail plea. The prosecution opposed his release, arguing that the investigation was ongoing and that Malik had not cooperated with authorities.
Defense Arguments
Malik’s defense, represented by Advocate Gorakh Liman, contended that he was falsely implicated in the case. The defense pointed out that the recovered quantity of Mephedrone fell under the category of ‘intermediate quantity,’ making the stringent provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act inapplicable. It was further emphasized that Malik had no prior criminal record, had been in custody since his arrest, and that there was nothing left to be recovered from him. Additionally, Malik assured the court of his full cooperation in the investigation and trial.
Court’s Observations
The presiding judge, H.H.J. K.P. Kshirsagar, noted that the alleged recovery did not fall under the commercial quantity threshold, which would have otherwise made bail restrictions more stringent. The court acknowledged that personal liberty is a fundamental right and emphasized the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.
While granting bail, the court remarked that the object of bail is not punitive or preventive but rather to ensure the accused’s presence during trial. It was also observed that Malik had cooperated with the investigation and there were no substantial grounds to justify his continued detention.
Bail Conditions
Malik was granted bail on the execution of a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with one or more sureties of the same amount. The court imposed several conditions to safeguard the interests of the prosecution, including:
- Malik must cooperate with the Investigating Officer and appear for questioning whenever required.
- He is prohibited from tampering with prosecution evidence or influencing witnesses.
- He must not commit any criminal offense while on bail.
- He and his surety must provide their mobile numbers and proof of residence at the time of executing the bail bond.
- He must cooperate with the trial proceedings for the swift disposal of the case.
Conclusion
The court’s decision highlights the balance between an individual’s right to liberty and the need for a fair investigation. While the bail does not determine guilt or innocence, it ensures that the accused remains available for trial without unnecessary pre-trial detention. The prosecution, however, retains the right to present further evidence during the trial, which will ultimately determine Malik’s culpability in the case.
The case continues to be under investigation, and further developments are expected as the trial progresses.
