Mohammad Asif Abdul Gani Maniyar vs State of Maharashtra — Narcotics (NDPS) | Bombay HC (2026)

Mohammad Asif Abdul Gani Maniyar vs State of Maharashtra — Narcotics (NDPS) | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant enlarged on bail on executing PR Bond of Rs.50,000/- with one or two local sureties in the like amount, subject to conditions: (i) attendance before the concerned Trial Court on each and every date unless exempted; (ii) monthly attendance at the concerned Police Station on first Saturday between 11:00 a.m. to 02:00 p.m.; (iii) deposit of passport, if not already deposited, with the concerned Police Station; (iv) no departure from India without permission of the Trial Court; (v) no tampering with or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or persons concerned with the case; (vi) informing latest place of residence and contact number, and changes thereto, to the Court seized of the matter and the Investigating Officer; (vii) co-operation with conduct of trial; (viii) any infraction shall entail cancellation of bail. Application allowed and disposed of in the above terms; observations prima facie and confined to the application.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Applicant, arrested in CR No.275 of 2025 (D.N. Nagar Police Station) for offences under Sections 8(c), 22(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act after seizure of about 60 grams of Mephedrone, should be enlarged on bail. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

To determine whether the seized contraband is of commercial quantity or otherwise, it was necessary for the prosecution to show the weight of the plastic bag and the zip-lock bag in which the contraband was weighed.

Key takeaways

In absence of any evidence of the weight of the bags, the Court held (prima facie) that this might not be a case of commercial quantity of contraband.ratio¶16
Since the seized quantity was prima facie not established to be commercial, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would not apply, enabling grant of bail.ratio¶16
All observations in the judgment are prima facie and confined to this bail application; the learned Trial Judge is to decide the case on its own merits, uninfluenced by these observations.obiter

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

BAIL – NDPS ACT – COMMERCIAL QUANTITY – WEIGHING ALONGWITH PACKAGING: Applicant Mohammad Asif Abdul Gani Maniyar sought bail in CR No.275 of 2025 (D.N. Nagar Police Station, Mumbai; dated 19-02-2025) for offences under Sections 8(c), 22(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, having been arrested after seizure of Mephedrone weighing about 60 grams from his possession on 19-02-2025; charge-sheet filed. Per the Panchanama, the contraband was found in a plastic bag which, before weighing, was kept inside another zip-lock bag, and the weight of neither bag was shown. Held (prima facie): the prosecution was required to show the weight of the bags to determine whether the seized contraband was of commercial quantity; absent such evidence, this might not be a case of commercial quantity, and therefore the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would not apply. Learned counsel had placed reliance on orders of the Court/Co-ordinate Bench dated 06-03-2026 (Bail Application No.4233 of 2025) and 03-12-2025 (Bail Application No.4941 of 2024) on the same point. Applicant enlarged on bail on PR bond of Rs.50,000/- with one or two local sureties in the like amount, subject to conditions (attendance before Trial Court on all dates unless exempted; monthly reporting at the concerned police station on first Saturday, 11:00 a.m.–02:00 p.m.; deposit of passport if not already deposited; no departure from India without Trial Court permission; no tampering with or contact with complainant/witnesses; intimation of residence/mobile details to the Trial Court and Investigating Officer; co-operation with trial; infraction to entail cancellation of bail). All observations prima facie and confined to the application; Trial Judge to decide uninfluenced. (Coram: R. M. Joshi, J.; decided 20-04-2026.)

29_BA_4648_2025.DOC

Prasad

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.4648 OF 2025

Mohammad Asif Abdul Gani Maniyar …Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra …Respondent

Mr. Kamlesh M. Satre , for the Applicant. Mr. A.S. Gawai , APP for the Respondent - State. PSI – Vaibhav Khade, D.N. Nagar Police Station, Mumbai, present.

CORAM: R. M. JOSHI, J. DATED: 20^th APRIL, 2026.

PC:-

The Applicant seeks his release on bail in connection with CR No.275 of 2025 dated 19^th February, 2025 registered with D.N. Nagar Police Station, for offence punishable under Sections 8(c), 22(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

In short, it is the case of the prosecution that on 19^th February, 2025, the Applicant was intercepted and, from his possession Mephedrone weighing about 60 grams was seized. The Applicant came to be arrested in connection with this crime. On completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed.

Learned counsel for the Applicant drew attention of the Court to the Panchanama indicating that as per the case of the prosecution, the contraband was found in a plastic bag and weight

Page 1 of 4 20^th April, 2026.

29_BA_4648_2025.DOC

of the same is done after keeping the said plastic bag in another zip-lock bag. It is his submission that in absence of weight of the plastic bag and zip-lock bag, it cannot be said that the seized contraband is of commercial quantity. To support his submission he placed reliance on orders of this Court and Co-ordinate Bench of this Court dated 6^th March, 2026 and 3^rd December, 2025 in Bail Application Nos.4233 of 2025 and 4941 of 2024 respectively.

Learned APP opposed the application by contending that 60 grams of Mephedrone recovered from the Applicant is of commercial quantity. It is his submission that there are nine antecedents against the Applicant though not under the NDPS Act.

Prima facie perusal of the record supports the contention of the learned counsel for the Applicant that the contraband was found with the Applicant in a plastic bag. Before weighing the same, the said plastic bag was kept in another ziplock plastic bag. Thus, it was necessary for the prosecution to show the weight of the bags in order to determine the commercial quantity or otherwise of the contraband. In absence of any such evidence, there is no other option but to hold that this might be not the case of commercial quantity of contraband. As such, rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would not apply. Hence, following order.

ORDER

i) The Applicant be enlarged on bail, on executing PR Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/ with one or two local sureties in the like amount;

Page 2 of 4 20^th April, 2026.

29_BA_4648_2025.DOC

ii) The Applicant shall attend the Trial Court concerned on each and every date unless exempted by the orders of the Trial Court concerned;

iii) The Applicant shall also attend the Police Station concerned once in a month on first Saturday between 11:00 a.m. to 02:00p.m.;

iv) If the Applicant has not deposited his passport, if any, the Applicant shall deposit the same with the Police Station concerned;

v) The Applicant shall not leave India, without the permission of the Trial Court;

vi) The Applicant shall not tamper or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case;

vii) The Applicant shall inform his latest place of residence and contact number immediately after being released and / or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time to the Court seized of the matter and to the Investigating Officer of the Police Station concerned;

viii) The Applicant to co-operate with the conduct of the trial;

ix) Any infraction of the aforesaid conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.

Page 3 of 4 20^th April, 2026.

29_BA_4648_2025.DOC

Application is allowed in the above terms and is accordingly disposed of.

It is made clear that the observations made herein are prima facie and are confined to this Application and the learned Trial Judge to decide the case on its own merits, uninfluenced by the observations made herein.

(R. M. JOSHI, J.)

Page 4 of 4

20^th April, 2026.