Shoabib Akhtar Siraj Ahmad vs the State of Maharashtra

By the present application, Applicant is seeking bail in Crime No. 99 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) and 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 registered with Ayeshanagar Police Station, Tal. Malegaon, Dist. Nashik. Said crime registered as Sessions Case No. 110 of 2025 and is pending before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Malegaon, Dist. Nashik.

¶15

There are four Accused in the present crime. Applicant is Accused No.1.

¶16

Case of the prosecution is that police received secret information of a person selling M.D. powder/drug in Malegaon. In the raid conducted by the police, Applicant was found possessing 56.9 gram M.D. powder worth Rs.2,27,600/-.

1

Gayatri Shimpi

8-BA-3268-2025.odt

Applicant was arrested. Criminal Bail Application No. 274 of 2025 at Exhibit-1 filed by the Applicant was rejected by the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Malegaon, Dist. Nashik, on 16 April, 2025.

¶21

Ms. Sana Khan, learned Advocate for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is seeking bail on the ground of non-compliance of the provisions of Section 50(1) of the NDPS Act. She points out to the notice dated 27^th November, 2024 issued under Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, to submit that the Police Inspector himself had offered the Applicant to search by himself or by through another Gazetted Officer. She submits that the same is contrary to law.

¶22

Mr. Amit Palkar, learned APP concedes to the fact that notice dated 27^th November, 2024 is not in compliance with the mandate of Section 50(1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

¶23

Perused the records with the assistance of the learned Advocate.

¶24

Section 50 (1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 reads as under :-

¶25

Conditions - under which search of persons shall be conducted.

¶26

(1) When any officer duly authorised under section 42 is about to search any person under the provisions of section 41, section 42 or section 43, he shall, if such person so requires, take such person without unnecessary delay to nearest Gazetted Officer of any of the departments mentioned in section 42 or to the nearest Magistrate.

¶27

Notice dated 27^th November, 2024 (on Page 66 of the paper book) issued to the Applicant, is in the handwriting of the Police

2

Gayatri Shimpi

8-BA-3268-2025.odt

Inspector Ayeshanagar Police Station, the same reads as follows :-

¶32

lqpuki=

¶33

N.D.P.S. Act 50 izek.ks

ekysxko

fnukad 27@11@2024

izfr]

‘kks,c v[rj fljkt vgen o; 38 o”ksZ

¶38

fuokl& ?kj ua-931] xYyh uacj 5] pkan.kh pkSd]

¶39

blykeiqjk ekysxkao] rk- ekysxkao

¶40

orZeku iRrk& ikdiatru pkSd] vDlk dkWyuh iIiq rkt buds ?kjds fiNs]

¶41

ekysxkao] rk- ekysxkao-

¶42

vkidh bl lqpuk i=ls lqfpr fd;k tkrk gS dh] ges xksifu; lq=ksls ekyqekr feyh gS dh vki u’kk dj.ks okyh ,e-Mh-oko cspus ds fy, vk;s gS! ,sls geS [kcj feyh gS! Blfy;s eS iqfyl fufj{kd iz’kkar vkfgjs vk;’kkuxj iks-Bk.ks ekysxko vkidh ryk’kh ys ldrk gq! EkS Hkh jktif=r vf/kdkjh gw! ,slh ryk’kh naMkf/kdkjh ;k fdlh jktif=r vkf/kdkjh ds lkeus ns.ks dk vkidks vf/kdkj gS! vxj vkidks fdlh nqljs naMkf/kdkjh ;k jktif=r vf/kdkjh ds lkeus ryk’kh ns.ks dh] bPNk gks rks mldk Hkh izc/k fd;k x;;k vxj vki pkgrs gks rks vki gekjh ryk’kh ys ldrs gks!

¶43

lqpuki= feyk

¶44

fnukad 27@11@2024

¶45

&&&&&& iksyhl fufj{kd vk;’kkuxj iksyhl Bk.ks

¶46

eS ‘kks,c v[krj fljkt vgen o; 39 o”ksZ fuokl & ?kj ua- 931] xYyh uacj 5] pkan.kh pkSd] blykeiqjk ekysxkao] rk- ekysxko ;g fy[kdj nsrk gq dh] eq>s rqEgkjs flok; nqljs fdlh Hkh jktif=r vf/kdkjh }kjk esjh ryk’kh ugh nsuk gS! eq>s rqgkjh vkSj rqEgkjs lkFk okys LvkQ dh] fdlh Hkh izdkj dh] ryk’kh ugh ysuh gS! Vki esjh ryk’kh ys ldrs gks! Rqke esjh ryk’kh yks! eq>s pysxk! lwpuki= eq>s fganh Hkk”kk es i<dj lquk;k vkSj fn[kk;k x;k gS!

iap dh Lok{kjh

1- &&&&& 2- &&&&

Lok{kjh

fn-27@11@2054

3

Gayatri Shimpi

8-BA-3268-2025.odt

Perusal of the said notice dated 27^th November, 2024 indicates that Police Inspector, Ayeshanagar Police Station, at the inception informed the Applicant that he himself is the Gazetted Officer and then apprised the Applicant with his right to be searched by other Gazetted Officer or Magistrate. Said act of Police Inspector amounts to breach of Police Section 50(1) of NDPS Act.

¶56

1. In the case of Ashok Muktinath Pande', this Court in an identical situation in paragraph 3 has observed as follows:

¶57

"3) A bare perusal of the first information report discloses that when the Police Inspector Shri Jagtap at the inception itself informed the applicant that he himself is a Gazetted Officer, the provisions of Section 50(1) of the NDPS Act have been clearly breached. The said alleged appraisal under Section 50(1) of the NDPS Act is contrary to the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Rajasthan Vs. Parmanand and anr. reported in (2014) 5 SCC 345 and in the case of Special Leave to Appeal (Cri.) No.4590 of 2015(Gurnam Singh @ Gagan vs. State of Punjab). The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dharmaveer Lekhram Sharma Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 2001(5) BCR (Cri.) 9 has also held in the similar manner. This Court in Bail Application No. 1145/2015 in the case of Afaque Asif Sayyed Vs. State of Maharashtra by following the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court and the Division Bench of this Court has observed that the moment the Police Officer informs the applicant that he himself is the Gazetted Officer, and then apprises the accused with his right to be searched by other Gazetted Officer or Magistrate, the provisions of Section 50(1) of the NDPS Act are violated. In view of the above, the applicant has made out a case to be released.

¶58

In view of the above and on account of the breach of the provisions of Section 50(1) of the NDPS Act, the Applicant is entitled to bail. Present Bail Application is allowed, on the following conditions:-

4

Gayatri Shimpi

8-BA-3268-2025.odt

(a) Applicant is directed to be released on bail in connection with in Crime No.99 of 2024 registered with Ayeshanagar Police Station, Tal. Malegaon, Dist. Nashik, on his furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one or two local sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of Additional Sessions Judge, Malegaon, Dist. Nashik.

¶63

(b) Applicant shall attend and regularly appear before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Malegaon, Dist. Nashik in Sessions Case No. 110 of 2025 on each date of hearing, unless specifically exempted by the Court.

¶64

(c) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing the facts to the Court or any police officer and shall not tamper with evidence.

¶65

(d) Applicant upon his release, within 3 days shall furnish to the Investigation Officer, Ayeshanagar Police Station, Tal. Malegaon, Dist. Nashik his residential address with proof and the contact number and to keep the Investigation Officer intimated about the change in the same from time to time.

¶66

The Bail Application No.3268 of 2025 is allowed in the above said terms.

¶67

(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)

¶68

5

¶69

Gayatri Shimpi

Shoabib Akhtar Siraj Ahmad v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shoabib Akhtar Siraj Ahmad v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Maharashtra vs Chandrabhan @ Bhanu Vishwanath Khalade

Shilratan Shrimant Gaikwad and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sandip Dadu Khalse vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Salim Kalindar Shaikh vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Gorakhnath Maruti Joshi vs State of Maharashtra

Balu Rambhau @ Ramji Ubale vs the State of Maharashtra