Aryan Bijoy Kuruvitil vs the State of Maharashtra — Narcotics (NDPS) | Bombay HC (2026)

Aryan Bijoy Kuruvitil vs the State of Maharashtra — Narcotics (NDPS) | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail in Crime No.159 of 2024 (Kamothe Police Station, Navi Mumbai) on furnishing a PR bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount; conditions: the Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and/or influence the prosecution witnesses, and shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when required; the Trial Court to decide the case on its own merits and in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in the order.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Applicant is entitled to regular bail in Crime No.159 of 2024, in view of the contention that Section 42 of the NDPS Act was violated (secret information received by Police Naik not given to the superior officer, and Police Naik allegedly not an empowered officer for search and seizure under a Government Notification).

Court's answer

Police Naik Sanjay Fulkar had informed the Senior Police Inspector about the secret information, but no letter of information to the Superior Officer was produced on record.

Ratio / Principle

In the present case also there is non-compliance of Section 42 of the NDPS Act; accordingly, consistently with the Court's earlier order in Criminal Bail Application No.4243 of 2024 (whereby Omkar Khulte was released on bail for Section 42 non-compliance), bail was granted.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction (Shivkumar Dige, J.) — Criminal Bail Application No. 671 of 2025, decided 28th April 2026: regular bail allowed to Aryan Bijoy Kuruvitil, Applicant in Crime No.159 of 2024, Kamothe Police Station, Navi Mumbai, for offences under Sections 8(c) and 22(c) of the NDPS Act, 1985. Prosecution case: on 5th June 2024, on secret information, police apprehended the Applicant and found 14 LSD papers weighing 0.35 gm in his personal search; the learned APP contended the contraband was of commercial quantity and that release might lead to absconding or threatening of prosecution witnesses. Defence contention: violation of Section 42 of the NDPS Act — the secret information was received by Police Naik and was not given to the superior officer, and per a Government Notification a Police Naik is not an empowered officer for search and seizure under the NDPS Act. Held: although Police Naik Sanjay Fulkar had informed the Senior Police Inspector, no letter of information to the Superior Officer was produced on record; there was non-compliance of Section 42 of the NDPS Act. Applying the Court's own order dated 10th March 2025 in Criminal Bail Application No.4243 of 2024 (Omkar Sanjay Khutle V/s. The State of Maharashtra), whereby accused Omkar Khulte was released on bail for like Section 42 non-compliance, the Applicant was ordered released on a PR bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount, on conditions of not tampering with evidence or influencing prosecution witnesses and attending the concerned Police Station as and when required; the Trial Court to decide the case uninfluenced by the observations.

28-BA-671-2025 (CR).doc

N.S.Kamble

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 671 OF 2025

Aryan Bijoy Kuruvitil ...Applicant VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent

Digitally signed NILAM by NILAM SANTOSH SANTOSHKAMBLE KAMBLE Date: 2026.05.05 11:39:18 +0530

Mr.Rajendra Bidkar, for the Applicant. Mr.S.R. Agarkar, APP for Respondent-State. Mr.Prashant S. Tayade, API, Kamothe Police Station, Navi Mumbai.

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 28^th APRIL 2026

P.C. :

. By this Application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in

Crime No.159 of 2024 registered with Kamothe Police Station, Navi Mumbai, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) and 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (‘NDPS’ for short).

It is prosecution’s case that on 5^th June 2024 on secret information, the police apprehended the Applicant and in his personal search police found 14 LSD papers weighing 0.35 gm.

It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that there is violation of the Section 42 of the NDPS Act, as information was received by Police Naik and the said information was not given to superior officer. As

Page 1 of 3

28-BA-671-2025 (CR).doc

N.S.Kamble

per Government Notification, Police Naik is not empowered officer to conduct search and seizure under the NDPS act.

The learned counsel for the Applicant relied on Court in case of Omkar Sanjay Khutle V/s. The State of Maharashtra in Criminal Bail Application No.4243 of 2024 order dated 10^th March 2025.

It is contention of learned APP that information was given in writing by the concerned Police Naik and he had informed to senior police Inspector and thereafter it was informed to Assistant Police Commissioner telephonically. The entry was made in the station diary. There is compliance of Section-42 the NDPS Act. The APP further submitted that

the commercial quantity contraband was found in the possession of the Applicant. If the Applicant released on bail, he may abscond or threaten and prosecution witnesses, and requested to reject the Application.

I have heard both learned counsel. Perused charge-sheet and documents produced on record.

It appears that Police Naik-Sanjay Fulkar informed about the secret information to Senior Police Inspector, but there is no letter of information to the Superior Officer produced on record. This Court has released Omkar Khulte accused in said crime on bail for non-compliance of the Section 42 in Criminal Bail Application No.4243 of 2024. In present

Page 2 of 3

28-BA-671-2025 (CR).doc

N.S.Kamble

case also there is non-compliance of the Section 42 of NDPS Act and I pass following order.

ORDER

(i) The Applicant be released on bail in Crime No.159 of

2024 registered with Kamothe Police Station, Navi Mumbai, on furnishing PR bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount.

(ii) The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and/or influence the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits and in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.

(iv) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when required.

(v) Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms.

(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

Page 3 of 3