Dismissed

Ugochukwu David @ John v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Sept 2026CRM-M/22372/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a bail petition for offenses under the NDPS and Foreigners Act. The High Court dismissed the petition, noting the gravity of allegations, petitioner's foreign nationality, involvement in multiple cases, and lack of grounds to treat him at parity with the co-accused who was granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Bail petition dismissed; no grant of relief.

Ugochukwu David @ John Vs State of Haryana — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

CRM-M-22372-2026 (O&M) 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-22372-2026 (O&M)

¶3

UGOCHUKWU DAVID @ JOHN

. .. Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

¶9

1	The date when thejudgment is reser ved	09.09.2026
2	The date when the judgment is pron ounced	10.09.2026
3	The web date when the judgment is uplo site aded on the	10.09.2026
4	Whe pron pron ther only operative part of the ju ounced or whether the full judg ounced dgment is ment is	Full
5	The judg delay, if any, of the pronouncem ment and reasons thereof. ent of full	Not applicable

¶10

Present: M r. Ravi Malik, Advocate for th e petitioner

¶11

M r. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Harya n a

¶12

¶13

MANISHA BATRA, J.

¶14

T he instant petition has been file d by the petitioner under Sectio n 483 of Bhar a tiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) fo r grant of regular bail in case arising out of FIR No.403 dated 16.06.202 5 registered un d er Sections 20(B)II(C), 21C a n d 29 of the Narcotic Drugs an d Psychotropic Substances Act (for short “N D PS Act”) and Section 14 o f Foreigners A c t at Police Station Sadar Gurug r am, District Gurugram.

¶15

AMIT SHARMA 2026.09.10 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶16

CRM-M-22372-2026 (O&M) 2

¶17

A s per the allegations, on 16. 0 6.2025, on receipt of a secre t information t o the effect that the accused Bi m al Pahadi who was hailing fro m Nepal, was i n dulged in the business of sale of narcotic substances and ha d been present in Gurugram from the last fe w days and that he was havin g substantial q u antity of narcotic substanc e s with him and could b e apprehended w ith the same, a raiding party w as formed by believing the sai d information t o be true. Members of raidin g team reached at the informe d place and ap p rehended accused Bimal Pah a di. On conducting his search , recovery of 1 060 grams of Sulfa (charas) a nd 116 grams of cocaine wa s effected fro m his possession. The aforem e ntioned accused was formall y arrested. On interrogation, he suffered dis c losure statement admitting hi s involvement i n the crime. On the basis of his disclosure statement as suffere d on 17.06.202 5 , one Nigerian namely Ugoc h ukwu David @ John i.e. th e present petiti o ner and one Lal Kothari were nominated as accused. Durin g the course of investigation, accused Lal Kot h ari was arrested on 18.06.202 5 and on the s ame day, petitioner was also apprehended. The petitione r suffered disc l osure statement admitting his involvement in the crime an d upon his disc l osure, some other co-accused w ere nominated as accused. H e alongwith the other accused moved an appl i cation for grant of regular bai l which has be e n dismissed by the Court of Le a rned Additional Sessions Judge , Gurugram vi d e order dated 10.02.2026.

¶18

AMIT SHARMA 2026.09.10 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶19

CRM-M-22372-2026 (O&M) 3

¶20

I t is argued by learned counsel f o r the petitioner that he has bee n falsely implic a ted in this case on the basis o f disclosure statement of the co - accused whic h cannot be considered to be legally admissible in evidence . He is in custody since 18.06.2025. No recov e ry has been effected from him . He has been m ade a scapegoat to let off real c u lprits. The co-accused has bee n extended ben e fit of bail. Principle of parity w eighs in his favour. With thes e broad submis s ions, it is urged that he deserve s to be released on bail.

¶21

L earned State counsel has argu e d that taking into consideratio n the gravity of the allegations levelled against the petitioner, the fact that he i s foreign natio n al and was involved in the busi n ess of illicit trading of narcoti c substance an d is involved in 02 more cases of similar nature, he does no t deserve to b e extended benefit of bail a n d the petition deserve to b e dismissed.

¶22

T his Court has heard the rival submissions made by learne d counsel for th e parties.

¶23

T he petitioner, who is a foreign n ational, is alleged to have bee n involved in illicit trading of narcotic substa n ces. As per the allegations, h e had been op e rating an established cross-bo r der narcotics procurement an d sale network by sourcing the contraband through a Nigerian syndicat e operating in D elhi and sold narcotics locally in Gurugram to fund his travel . He is also all e ged to have been smuggling c ocaine. His antecedents are no t clean, as he is found to be involved in two ot h er cases under the provisions o f

¶24

AMIT SHARMA 2026.09.10 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶25

CRM-M-22372-2026 (O&M) 4

¶26

NDPS Act. T h e allegations against him are s e rious in nature. The contentio n that he can a bscond, if extended benefit o f bail, cannot be stated to b e unfounded. T h e trial is going on and there is n othing on record to suggest tha t there would b e any undue delay in conclusi o n of the same. In view of th e above discussed facts, he cannot be stated to be treated at parity with the co - accused who h as been extended benefit of ba i l. Taking into consideration th e above discuss e d facts, this Court is of the co n sidered opinion that the petitio n does not dese r ve to be allowed. Accordingly, t he same is dismissed.

¶27

I t is made clear that any observ a tion made herein above is onl y for the purpo s e of deciding the present petit i on and the same shall have n o bearing on th e merits of the case.

¶28

S ince the main petition has been dismissed, pending application , if any, is rend e red infructuous.

¶29

(MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE

¶30

10.09.2026 Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Amit Sharma Whether reportable:- Yes/No

¶31

AMIT SHARMA 2026.09.10 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

Ugochukwu David @ John v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ugochukwu David @ John v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases