Dismissed¶¶33

Usman v. the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Delhi HC22 Apr 2025BAIL APPLN./4625/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail refused — NDPS ganja case. Delhi High Court, Justice Girish Kathpalia, 22.04.2025, dismisses Bail Appln. 4394/2024 (Subhash Bhati) and 4625/2024 (Usman) arising from FIR 261/2023 PS Crime Branch, Ss. 20/29 NDPS Act; 108 kg ganja seized from Pravez @ Bhoora at New Delhi Railway Station on 29.10.2023; bank credit entries showing substantial money trail Pravez→Usman→Subhash Bhati/Shuaib; no documents of alleged petty business dealings produced despite opportunity; CDRs relied on; chargesheet filed, charges not framed.

What did the court decide?

None; regular bail refused and both bail applications (Bail Appln. 4394/2024 of Subhash Bhati and Bail Appln. 4625/2024 of Usman) dismissed. ¶¶33

Usman Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi — Narcotics (NDPS) | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; regular bail refused and both bail applications (Bail Appln. 4394/2024 of Subhash Bhati and Bail Appln. 4625/2024 of Usman) dismissed.

¶¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused/applicants Subhash Bhati and Usman are entitled to regular bail in case FIR No. 261/2023, PS Crime Branch, for offences under Sections 20/29 NDPS Act. +1 more

¶¶21

Court's answer

Beyond the money trail from Pravez to the other accused, the prosecution also relies upon CDRs; co-accused Pravez continues in custody and, though the chargesheet stands filed, charges are yet to be framed.

¶¶32

Ratio / Principle

The inter-se money transfers among the accused shown in the bank credit entries are substantial and not of petty amount, contrary to the defence characterisation of them as petty business transactions.

¶¶28

Key takeaways

Considering the overall circumstances, the court found both bail applications unfit for grant of bail and dismissed them.ratio¶¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi (Girish Kathpalia J., oral judgment), 22.04.2025 — Bail Appln. 4394/2024 (Subhash Bhati) and Bail Appln. 4625/2024 (Usman) v. State (GNCTD): regular bail sought in FIR No. 261/2023, PS Crime Branch, under Sections 20/29 NDPS Act, arising out of seizure of 108 kg ganja from a parcel carried by co-accused Pravez @ Bhoora at New Delhi Railway Station on 29.10.2023. Prosecution relied on bank credit entries showing transfers from Pravez to Usman, from Usman to Subhash Bhati and from Usman to Shuaib; counsel for the applicants, though given time and a further offer to place on record documents of alleged business dealings, produced nothing and described the transactions as petty. The court held the money transactions were substantial, not petty, noted that CDRs also existed, that co-accused Pravez remained in jail, and that the chargesheet was filed though charges were yet to be framed. Considering the overall circumstances, both bail applications were dismissed.

¶1

$~5&6

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 22.04.2025

¶4

+ BAIL APPLN. 4394/2024

¶5

SUBHASH BHATI .....Petitioner

¶6

Through: Mr. P. Pratap Singh and Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate

¶7

versus

¶8

THE STATE GOVT.OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhya, ASC with Mr. Abhijeet Kumar, Advocate for State

¶9

ASI Sachin Singh, PS Crime Branch

¶10

+ BAIL APPLN. 4625/2024

¶11

USMAN .....Petitioner

¶12

Through: Mr. P. Pratap Singh and Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate versus THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Ms. Richa Dhawan, APP for State with ASI Sachin Singh, PS Crime Branch

¶13

CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

¶14

J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

¶15

In furtherance of last order, learned counsel for accused/applicants submits that they have no document at all, reflecting any business

¶16

Bail Applications No. 4394/2024 & 4625/2024 Page 1 of 4 pages

¶17

Digitally signed by GIRISH GIRISH KATHPALIA KATHPALIA Date: 2025.04.22 18:36:38 -07'00'

¶18

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:2 2.04.2025 19:01:07

¶19

transaction between them. On last date, after part submissions, learned counsel for accused/applicants had taken adjournment to produce some reliable material in support of his contention that accused Usman, Pravez and Shuaib were co-villagers and had business transactions, and the accused/applicant Subhash Bhati being a cloth merchant, he also had business transactions with the remaining accused persons. Learned counsel for accused/applicants is offered more time to obtain and place on record documents reflecting the alleged business transactions, but he expresses his inability to avail the offer, stating that the transactions were of petty business, so they do not have any document.

¶20

Under these circumstances, I have heard learned counsel for accused/applicants and learned prosecutor.

¶21

The accused/applicants seek regular bail in case FIR No. 261/2023 of PS Crime Branch for offence under Section 20/29 NDPS Act. Briefly stated, prosecution case is as follows. On the basis of secret information, on 29.10.2023 at about 02:45pm, one Pravez @ Bhoora, a resident of Muzaffarnagar, UP was apprehended at New Delhi Railway Station where he de-boarded from Kerala Express and was found to be carrying 108 kg ganja in a parcel. In the course of recovery proceedings, Pravez disclosed that the accused/applicant Subhash Bhati through one Gautam used to get released the consignments for Pravez against payments. Immediately, at platform No. 07 of New Delhi Railway Station, Gautam also was

¶22

Bail Applications No. 4394/2024 & 4625/2024 Page 2 of 4 pages

¶23

Digitally signed by GIRISH GIRISH KATHPALIA KATHPALIA Date: 2025.04.22 18:36:19 -07'00'

¶24

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:2 2.04.2025 19:01:07

¶25

apprehended and was found carrying the booking slip of the parcel. Further investigation revealed that the present accused/applicants were working with accused Pravez. It was revealed that the accused Shuaib used to procure ganja from Andhra Pradesh and the same used to be transported to Delhi in train by Pravez to be handed over to accused Usman with the help of accused Gautam and accused Subhash Bhati.

¶26

Learned counsel for accused/applicants submits that the accused/ applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated. It is contended on behalf of accused/applicants that there is no evidence against them.

¶27

On the other hand, learned prosecutor has referred to multiple credit entries in the bank accounts reflecting transfer of substantial amount of money from Pravez to Usman and from Usman to Subhash Bhati and from Usman to Shuaib. It is those credit entries, which learned counsel for accused/applicants projected as business transactions between the said three accused persons and on last date took time to produce documentary record of transactions.

¶28

Today, it is submitted by learned counsel for accused/applicants that he could not get any documentary record of any business transactions between the said three persons. The said money transactions are not of petty amount; as mentioned above those are substantial amounts.

¶29

Bail Applications No. 4394/2024 & 4625/2024 Page 3 of 4 pages

¶30

GIRISH KATHPALIA Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2025.04.22 18:35:49 -07'00'

¶31

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:2 2.04.2025 19:01:07

¶32

Apart from the money transactions from Pravez to the remaining accused persons, there are also CDRs as per prosecution. The accused Pravez continues to be in jail. Chargesheet has been filed, but charges are yet to be framed.

¶33