Mumbai, April 12, 2024 – Yunus Umar Wadia has been granted bail by the Special Court for Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, Greater Mumbai, in a case involving an intermediate quantity of Mephedrone (MD). Special Judge K.P. Kshirsagar (Court Room No. 43) issued the order on April 12, 2024.

Wadia was arrested in connection with C.R. No. 273/2024, registered at the Pydhonie Police Station, for offenses under Section 8(c) read with Section 22(b) and Section 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

Background and Allegations:

On March 28, 2024, Wadia and co-accused Sohail Sattar Patni were apprehended based on prior information. 5 grams of Mephedrone (MD) were allegedly recovered from Wadia’s possession, and 10 grams of Mephedrone (MD) were allegedly recovered from Patni’s possession.

Arguments Presented:

Advocate Mahendra Patnekar, representing Wadia, argued that this was his client’s first bail application and that no other applications were pending in higher courts. He emphasized that the cumulative quantity of contraband recovered was an intermediate quantity, thus the stringent provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act did not apply. He highlighted that Wadia had no prior criminal record, had been in custody since March 28, 2024, and that nothing further needed to be recovered from him. He also stated that Wadia was a Mumbai resident and willing to abide by all court conditions.

Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Rajput opposed the bail, arguing that the investigation was ongoing, a wanted accused was yet to be arrested, and that Wadia’s release could hamper the investigation.

Court’s Reasoning and Decision:

Judge Kshirsagar noted that the cumulative quantity of Mephedrone recovered was an intermediate quantity, making Section 37 of the NDPS Act inapplicable. He also observed that Wadia had no criminal antecedents and was a Mumbai resident. The court acknowledged that Wadia had been in custody since March 28, 2024, and that nothing further needed to be recovered from him.

The court emphasized the importance of personal liberty, the presumption of innocence, and the purpose of bail, which is to secure the accused’s attendance at trial, not to punish or prevent. The court found that Wadia had cooperated during the investigation and was likely to attend future proceedings if released on bail.

Considering the nature and gravity of the offense, Wadia’s age and antecedents, and the prima facie material on record, the court found no reason to further detain him.

Bail Conditions:

Wadia was granted bail upon executing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with one or more sureties of the same amount. The following conditions were imposed:

• Wadia must cooperate with the investigating officer and be available for interrogation when required.
• He must not tamper with prosecution evidence or influence witnesses.
• He must cooperate in the early disposal of the trial.
• He must not commit any criminal offense while on bail.
• He and his surety must provide their mobile numbers, present addresses, and proof of residence at the time of executing the bail bonds.

Order Details:

The order was dictated, transcribed, checked, and signed on April 12, 2024, and uploaded on the same day at 5:00 p.m.

This decision reflects the court’s consideration of the quantity of drugs recovered, the inapplicability of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, Wadia’s lack of criminal record, and the imposition of conditions to ensure his compliance with the legal process.