Disposed¶20

Nayan Rasikbhai Gadhesaria v. Union of India and Anr.

Bombay HC19 Aug 2025BA/1691/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court, Bail Application No.1691 of 2025, Nayan Rasikbhai Gadhesaria v. Union of India & Anr., Milind N. Jadhav, J., order dated 05-05-2025 — S.439 CrPC bail plea by accused No.5 in NCB C.R. No.6 of 2024 (15 kg Nitrazepam tablets); implication rests on accused No.4's S.67 NDPS Act disclosure naming Applicant as assistant/supplier; prima facie no other incriminating material; notice issued to Respondents; Union of India directed to file affidavit in reply within 4 weeks; matter listed 11-07-2025; bail undecided.

What the court decided

AI extract

Nayan Rasikbhai Gadhesaria vs Union of India and Anr. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Bombay HC (2025)

¶1

1 ba 1691-25.doc

¶2

Laxmi Sontakke (P.A.)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

BAIL APPLICATION NO.1691 OF 2025

¶6

Digitally signed by LAXMI LAXMI SUBHASH SUBHASH SONTAKKE SONTAKKE Date: 2025.05.06 18:28:17 +0530

¶7

Nayan Rasikbhai Gadhesaria .. Applicant

¶8

Versus Union of India & Anr. .. Respondents

¶9

Ms. Munira Palanpurwalla, Advocates for Applicant.

¶10

Mr. Hitendra J. Dedhia for the State.

¶11

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : MAY 05, 2025

¶12

P.C.:

¶13

Heard Palanpurwalla, learned Advocate for Applicant and Mr. Dedhia, learned APP for Respondent.

¶14

This is an Application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) seeking Bail in connection with C.R. No.6 of 2024 registered with NCB.

¶15

The Applicant is arrayed as accused No.5 in the present crime. Accused No.4 whose name has been disclosed by accused No.1 has named the present Applicant as one of the supplier of the alleged contraband. Accused No.1 was initially apprehended on 10^th April 2024 with the alleged contraband and he is under arrest since then. Alleged contraband is 15 kg of Nitrazepam tablets. Accused No.1 initially named accused Nos 2 and 3 as the purchasers of the alleged contraband but named accused No.4 as the supplier thereof. Accused

¶16

1 of 2

¶17

1 ba 1691-25.doc

¶18

No.4 in disclosure under Section 67 of NDPS Act enquiry has stated that since he could not procure the entire contraband, he took assistance of present Applicant-accused No.5. Applicant is a Pharmacist by profession. There is disclosure statement made under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, and that apart prima facie, there is no other incriminating material against Applicant's complicity.

¶19

Issue notice to the Respondents. Union of India has been served. As usual when the matter is called out, none is present for the Union of India. This is repeatedly noticed by the Court. A copy of this order shall be served on Union of India.

¶20

Union of India is directed to file affidavit in reply positively within a period of 4 weeks from today. No further extension of time shall be given.

¶21

List the matter on 11^th July 2025 .

¶22

[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

¶23

2 of 2

Nayan Rasikbhai Gadhesaria v. Union of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Nayan Rasikbhai Gadhesaria v. Union of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Niraj Ramasare Gaund vs the State of Maharashtra

Shoieb Haider Khan @ Shoieb Pathan vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Mohammad Irshad Mohd. Mumtaz Shaikh vs the State of Maharashtra

Vikram @ Vicky Gopinath Takate vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Birendra Shobhram Ghadse vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Mohd. Matin Yaseen Sheikh @ Dulare Khalu vs the State of Maharashtra