Allowed¶24

Mahendra Chandrapal Singh v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC28 Jan 2026BA/173/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay HC bail application allowed: applicant held with 4.750 gm Mephedrone (small quantity), Sections 8(c) and 22(a) NDPS Act, C.R.No. 140 of 2025, Dehu Road Police Station, Pune; no antecedents; release on P.R.Bond Rs. 30,000/- with like sureties plus reporting, no-witness-contact and foreign-travel-permission conditions; bail observations not to influence Trial Court.

What did the court decide?

Applicant enlarged on bail in C.R.No. 140 of 2025 (Dehu Road Police Station, Pune) on executing a P.R.Bond of Rs. 30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount, subject to conditions: attendance at the concerned police station as and when required; no tampering with evidence or influencing/contacting witnesses; prior permission of the Court before going abroad. ¶24

Mahendra Chandrapal Singh vs the State of Maharashtra — Narcotics (NDPS) | Bombay HC (2026)

¶1

7-BA-173-2026 (CR).doc

¶2

S.S.Kilaje

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 173 OF 2026

¶4

Mahendra Chandrapal Singh ….Applicant

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

The State Of Maharashtra …..Respondent

¶7

_________________________________________________________________ Mr. Yash Kamble i/b. Mr. Vishal Kolekar, Advocate for the Applicant. Ms. Mahalaxmi Ganpathy, APP for Respondent-State.

¶8

Digitally signed SONALI by SONALISATISH KILAJE SATISH Date: 2026.02.05 KILAJE 17:50:19+0700

¶9

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 2^nd FEBRUARY, 2026.

¶10

P.C. :

¶11

By this application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in C.R.No. 140 of 2025 registered with Dehu Road Police Station, Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) and 22(a) of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short "NDPS Act").

¶12

It is prosecution’s case that on 14.05.2025, at around 3:30 p.m., police apprehended the applicant. In his possession, police found 4.750 gm Mephedrone.

¶13

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is behind bars for around eight months. The applicant has no antecedents. The contraband found in the possession of the applicant was of small quantity and requested to allow the application.

¶14

Page 1 of 3

¶15

7-BA-173-2026 (CR).doc

¶16

S.S.Kilaje

¶17

It is contention of learned APP that the applicant was apprehended by the police. In his possession, police found Mephedrone. If the applicant released on bail, he may abscond or threaten prosecution witnesses. Hence, requested to reject the application.

¶18

I have heard both the learned counsel. Perused chargesheet and documents produced on record. The contraband found in the possession of the applicant is of small quantity. The applicant has no antecedents. Considering these facts, I pass following order.

¶19

ORDER

¶20

i. The applicant be enlarged on bail in C.R.No. 140 of 2025 registered with Dehu Road Police Station, Pune, on executing P.R.Bond of Rs. 30,000/- on furnishing one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶21

ii. The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required.

¶22

iii. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact witnesses or any person concerned with the case.

¶23

iv. Before going abroad the applicant shall take permission of this Court`.

¶24

The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is

¶25

Page 2 of 3

¶26

7-BA-173-2026 (CR).doc

¶27

S.S.Kilaje

¶28

accordingly disposed of. All pending applications, if any, disposed of.

¶29

It is made clear that the above observations are made only for the purpose of granting bail and the Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits in accordance with law and uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.

¶30

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

¶31

(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

¶32

Page 3 of 3

Mahendra Chandrapal Singh v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahendra Chandrapal Singh 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Eknath Tukaram Dagale vs the State of Maharashtra

Sahil @ Guddu Sandip Gaikwad vs the State of Maharashtra

Rushikesh Gujaba Gawade vs State of Maharashtra

Gordon Hall Apartments Co. Op Hsg Soc Ltd. vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Nilesh @ Tushar Ashok Borse vs the State of Maharashtra

Dnyaneshwar Balu Shelar vs State of Maharashtra