Mohammad Fahim Ansari Vs State of Karnataka

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO PASS AN ORDER TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON REGULAR BAIL IN SPL.C.C.NO.248/2026 AND IN CR.NO.199/2025 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 29 OF NDPS ACT 1985 AGAINST THE PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.3 AS MENTIONED IN THE CHARGE SHEET WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE THIS HOBNEL CITY CIVIL AND SESSION JUDGE CCH-35 BENGALURU.

¶16

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2026:KHC:34822 CRL.P No. 6854 of 2026

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

1. Accused No.3 in Spl.CC.No.248/2026 pending before the Court of XXXIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge (NDPS), Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.199/2025 registered by R T Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 29, 22(C), 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act, 1985 and Section 25-1(B)(b) of the Arms Act, 1959, is before this Court in this petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, seeking regular bail.

¶23

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶24

3. FIR in Crime No.199/2025 was registered by R T Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under Section 22(C) of the NDPS Act, 1985, against unknown person on the basis of the first information dated 05.08.2025 received from Prathap R, police officer attached to R T Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru. In the raid that was conducted subsequently to the house of accused No.1, contraband article allegedly ganja weighing 3 kgs 330 grams, contraband article

¶25

3 -

¶26

NC: 2026:KHC:34822 CRL.P No. 6854 of 2026

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

allegedly MDMA weighing 278 grams and other articles were recovered and seized under a panchanama. Based on the confession statement of accused No.1, petitioner was subsequently arrested on 11.08.2025 and remanded to judicial custody. After completing investigation, charge sheet has been filed against four persons and petitioner is arraigned as accused No.3 in the charge sheet. His bail application filed before the Trial Court in Crl.Misc.No.68/2026 was rejected on 30.01.2026. Therefore, he is before this Court.

¶29

4. Perusal of the material on record would go to show that contraband article has been seized in the present case from the possession of accused No.1. It appears that based on the confession statement of accused No.1 that the petitioner was supplying him contraband article, subsequently the petitioner was arrested on 11.08.2025 and remanded to judicial custody. Investigation of the case is completed and charge sheet has been filed. Learned Addl. SPP has submitted that except the confession statement of the co-accused, there is no other material to connect the petitioner to the present crime.

¶30

4 -

¶31

NC: 2026:KHC:34822 CRL.P No. 6854 of 2026

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tofan Singh

¶34

vs. State of Tamilnadu - (2021) 4 SCC 1 , has observed that confession statement of co-accused recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, 1985, is not an admissible evidence. Under the circumstances, the following order:-

¶35

The petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Spl.CC.No.248/2026 pending before the Court of XXXIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge (NDPS), Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.199/2025 registered by R T Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 29, 22(C), 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act, 1985 and Section 25-1(B)(b) of the Arms Act, 1959, s ubject to the following conditions:

¶36

a) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶37

b) The petitioner shall appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the Trial Court unless the Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons;

¶38

5 -

¶39

NC: 2026:KHC:34822 CRL.P No. 6854 of 2026

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

c) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

¶42

d) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future;

¶43

e) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without permission of the said Court until the case registered against him is disposed off.

¶44

Sd/(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶45

DN

¶46

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 54

Mohammad Fahim Ansari v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Fahim Ansari v. State of Karnataka

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

Kiran Kumar Vs State by Soladevanahalli Police Station

Abhishekh Gowda Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Gajendra Vs State of Karnataka

Smt.Sujatha S.H. Vs Sri.Shashidhar K H

Rambabu Kumar @ Lal Babu Kumar @ Ramababu Kumar Vs State by Tumakuru Rural Police

Harish Vs State of Karnataka