Mr M Mohammed Ziyad Vs State of Karnataka — Narcotics (NDPS) | Karnataka HC (2026)

Mr M Mohammed Ziyad Vs State of Karnataka — Narcotics (NDPS) | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the Trial Court rightly rejected the petitioner's application under Section 227 Cr.P.C for discharge, i.e., whether the charge-sheet material prima facie makes out the alleged NDPS offences against the petitioner (accused no.3). +1 more

Court's answer

The Trial Court was fully justified in rejecting the application filed by the petitioner under Section 227 of Cr.P.C, and this Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned order.

Ratio / Principle

The charge-sheet material prima facie makes out a case against the petitioner for the alleged offences, and the Trial Court therefore rightly rejected his Section 227 discharge application.

Key takeaways

The aforesaid judgments relied on by the petitioner cannot be made applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case, since the petitioner was found along with accused nos.1 and 2 in the house to which the raid was conducted and from which the contraband articles were seized.ratio¶50

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CRL.RP No. 1772 of 2025 (High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru; decided 07.01.2026; S Vishwajith Shetty, J.) — Accused no.3 in Spl.C.C.No.657/2021 (offences under Sections 8(c), 22(b), 20(B)(ii)(C) NDPS Act, Begur P.S.) challenged the Trial Court's order dated 11.09.2025 rejecting his Section 227 Cr.P.C discharge application. Counsel contended no contraband was seized from the petitioner's possession, that he was not present when the seizure was made and was arraigned only because his phone number was found with accused nos.1 and 2, and relied on Sanjeev (Crl.A. No.870/2016, disposed 09.03.2022), Yash Jayeshbhai Champaklal Shah (Crl.Mis.A. No.1234/2022) and Bharat Chaudhary (SLP(Crl) No.5703/2021). Held: the FIR (first information of G. Lakshmikanthaya, Inspector, Anti-Narcotics Wing, CCB, Bangalore) records a raid on 16.11.2019 on the house in which accused nos.1 to 3 resided, with contraband seized from the possession of the accused and from the house and subjected to panchanama; the FSL report is positive to the contraband substances; no material was produced before the Trial Court or this Court in support of the contention that the petitioner was at his parents' house; the cited precedents — rendered in a conviction/appeal setting or while allowing bail for want of conscious possession — cannot be made applicable where the petitioner was found along with accused nos.1 and 2 in the raided house. The Trial Court was 'fully justified' in rejecting the discharge application; revision petition dismissed; pending IAs do not survive for consideration.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:792 CRL.RP No. 1772 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1772 OF 2025

BETWEEN:

MR. M. MOHAMMED ZIYAD S/O M. MOHAMMED AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS ADDRESS AS PER CHARGE SHEET NO.18, 2ND FLOOR, 6TH CROSS MANGAMMANAPALYA BANGALORE - 560 068 ACTUALLY WAS RESIDING AT (SUPPORTED BY AADHAAR OF PETITIONER FATHER AND MOTHER) NO.24, F STREET 1ST CROSS, 2ND MAIN OLD DISPENSARY ROAD NEAR BANGALORE MEDICAL COLLEGE KALASIPALYAM, BANGALORE NORTH BANGALORE - 560 002 AADHAR CARD NO.3799 3087 2935.

…PETITIONER

Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

(BY KUM. ARYA GEORGE, ADV., FOR SRI BIJOY M.T, ADV.)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BEGUR POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU - 560 001.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP)

THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S 397 R/W 401 CR.PC (FILED U/S 438 R/W 442 BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER (ANNEXURE-A) PASSED BY THE HONBLE XXXIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:792 CRL.RP No. 1772 of 2025

HC-KAR

AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SPL.JUDGE (NDPS) CCH-33 BENGALURU IN SPL.C.C.NO.657/2021 DATED 11.09.2025.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

ORAL ORDER

Accused No.3 is before this Court in this Criminal

Revision Petition filed under Section 397 R/w Section 401 of Cr.P.C, with a prayer to set aside the order dated 11.09.2025 passed in Special C.C.No.657 of 2021 by the Court of XXXIII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge and Special Judge (NDPS) Bangalore registered for offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 22(b), 20(B)(ii)(C) of NDPS Act.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

Petitioner has been charge sheeted for the aforesaid offences by the respondent police and he is arrayed as accused no. 3 in the charge sheet. He had filed an application under Section 227 of Cr.P.C, before the Trial Court with a prayer to discharge him alleging that there is no sufficient material against him to frame charges for the alleged offences. The said

3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:792 CRL.RP No. 1772 of 2025

HC-KAR

application was opposed by the prosecution and the Trial Court vide the order impugned has rejected the said application. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that there is no seizure of any contraband article from the possession of the petitioner. The petitioner was not at all present at the spot when the seizure of the contraband articles were made. Only for the reason that his phone number was found with the accused nos.1 and 2, he was subsequently summoned and arraigned as accused in the present case. Petitioner is residing with his parents. She submits that Trial Court has failed to appreciate aforesaid aspects of the matter and has erred in rejecting application filed by the petitioner under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. In support of her argument, she has placed reliance on the following judgments:

SANJEEV AND ANOTHER V State of HIMACHAL PRADESH - CRIMINAL APPEAL No.870 of 2016 disposed of on 09.03.2022.

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:792 CRL.RP No. 1772 of 2025

HC-KAR

2. YASH JAYESHBHAI CHAMPAKLAL SHAH V. STATE

FO GUJARAT - Criminal Mis. Application No.1234 of 2022 dated 02.03.2022.

3. BHARAT CHAUDHARY V UNION Of INDIA - Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.5703 of 2021 disposed of on 13.12.2021 .

Per contra, learned HCGP for the respondent has argued in support of the order impugned and submits that the petitioner was found along with accused nos.1 and 2 at the spot from where the contraband articles were seized. Seizure is from the room in which accused nos.1 to 3 were residing and since the accused persons were in conscious possession of the contraband article, the Trial Court has rightly rejected application filed by the petitioner under Section 227 of Cr.P.C.

FIR in the present case has been registered based on the first information of G. Lakshmikanthaya, Inspector of Police, Anti-Narcotics Wing, CCB, Bangalore. In the first information, it is averred that based on credible information received, a raid was conducted to the house in which accused nos.1 to 3 were residing. The raid was conducted on

5 -

NC: 2026:KHC:792 CRL.RP No. 1772 of 2025

HC-KAR

16.11.2019 in the house in which accused nos.1 to 3 were residing and from the possession of the accused as well as from the house in which the accused were residing the contraband articles were seized and subjected to panchanama. Though learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner was not at all present at the spot of crime and when the raid was conducted and on the other hand he was in the house of his parents, no material is produced in support of such contention either before the Trial court or before this Court. The seized contraband articles were forwarded to Forensic Science Laboratory and the report received from the Forensic Science Laboratory are positive to the contraband substances. The trial Court having appreciated that the charge sheet material prima facie makes out a case against the petitioner for the alleged offences has rightly rejected the application filed by him under Section 227 of Cr.P.C.

The judgment in the case of SANJEEV AND ANOTHER (supra) has been rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a criminal appeal, which was filed challenging the judgment and order of conviction and in the said case, the

6 -

NC: 2026:KHC:792 CRL.RP No. 1772 of 2025

HC-KAR

order of acquittal passed by the Trial Court was set aside by the High Court, which was reversed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, taking into consideration that there was no recovery from the possession of the accused therein. The judgment in the case of YASH JAYESHBHAI CHAMPAKLAL SHAH (supra) and in the case of BHARAT CHAUDHARY (supra) have been rendered while considering bail application of an accused who was charge sheeted for offence punishable under the provisions of NDPS Act. In the said cases, for the reason that there was no material to show that the accused therein was in conscious possession of the contraband articles seized, he was directed to be enlarged on bail.

The aforesaid judgments cannot be made applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case, since the petitioner was found along with accused nos.1 and 2 in the house to which the raid was conducted and the contraband articles were seized. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the Trial Court was fully justified in rejecting the application filed by the petitioner under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. I do not find any reason to interfere with the same.

7 -

NC: 2026:KHC:792 CRL.RP No. 1772 of 2025

HC-KAR

Accordingly, revision petition is dismissed.

Pending IA'S does not survive for consideration.

Sd/(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

NMS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 55