RAVI KAMLESHBHAI PATELversusTHE UNION OF INDIA

      R/CR.MA/22069/2025                               ORDER DATED: 12/08/2026




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

 R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL -
            AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 22069 of 2025

==========================================================
                           RAVI KAMLESHBHAI PATEL
                                    Versus
                           THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. JAL S. UNWALA, SENIOR ADVOCATE C J GOGDA(7488) for the
Applicant(s) No. 1
VIKAS V NAIR(7444) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR UTKARSH R SHARMA(6157) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR. J.K.SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY

                                Date : 12/08/2026

                                    ORDER


1.       The Applicant has filed this Application under Section 439 of the
Indian Penal Code for enlarging the Applicant on Regular Bail in
connection with FIR being F.No. DRI/AZU/GI-02/ENQ-01/NDPS/2024
in Special NDPS Case No. 46 of 2024 pending before the Court of
Special Court (under NDPS Act), at Ahmedabad for the offence under
Sections 22, 23, 24, 25, 27-A, 28 & 29 read with Section 8(c) of NDPS
Act, 1985.

2.       Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. Jal S. Unwala appearing with
learned Advocate Mr. C.J.GOGDA for the Applicant, learned APP Mr.
J.K.shah appearing for the Respondent – State and learned Advocate Mr.
Utkarsh R. Sharma appearing on behalf of Respondent No.2 – Directorate
of Revenue Intelligence, DRI, Zonal Unit, Ahmedabad.


3.       Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Applicant has
submitted that the present Applicant is arraigned as an accused in the

                                    Page 1 of 4
     R/CR.MA/22069/2025                              ORDER DATED: 12/08/2026




present offence simply because he was a Director of the Company. There
is nothing on record nor the papers of investigation indicating any active
role being played by the present Applicant in commission of the offence
in question. As per the settled law in the absence of any material to show
any specific role being played by the Applicant in the offence, he cannot
be arraigned as an accused merely because he being a Director of the
Company. He further submitted that as per the report of the FSL itself,
the percentage of Ketamine found in the samples collected during the raid
was 6.9% and 3.5% respectively and therefore it can be gainfully said that
the substance was not Ketamine but was Hydroxylimine Hydrochloride.
The percentage of Ketamine found in the substance merely because of
some chemical reaction. He further submitted that the Applicant has been
arrested in connection with the present offence on 17.01.2024 and since
then he is in the custody. The Applicant has undergone incarceration for
more than two and half years and the trial of the offence has not yet
commenced. He therefore submitted to allow the present Application and
enlarge the Applicant on bail subject to suitable conditions.

5.      Learned Advocate Mr. Utkarsh Sharma appearing for Respondent
No.1 – Union of India - The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, DRI,
Zonal Unit, Ahmedabad, has opposed the present Application contending
that the present Applicant was the Director of the Company and he was
involved in day-to-day affairs of the company. The Applicant had played
an active role in hatching a conspiracy for committing the present
offence. He therefore submitted to dismiss the present Application.


6.      Learned APP for the Respondent – State has opposed the present
application for grant of regular bail and submitted that looking to the
nature of offence, this Court may not exercise the discretion in favour of
the applicant and the Application may be dismissed.


                                  Page 2 of 4
     R/CR.MA/22069/2025                                 ORDER DATED: 12/08/2026




7.      Heard learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties. It is
the case of the prosecution against the accused in the present case is that
the company with which they were associated was having a license to
manufacture Hydroxylimine Hydrochloride which is considered to be a
precursor for manufacturing of Ketamine. It is a contraband substance. It
is further the case of prosecution that under the guise of manufacturing
Hydroxylimine Hydrochloride, the company i.e. Megashri Agri Pharma
was manufacturing Ketamine and the said substance i.e. Ketamine was
being exported to Thailand by the company. On the basis of secret
information gathered by the Respondents, a shipment was intercepted by
the Respondent Authorities. The shipment in question was dispatched by
M/s Megashri Agri Pharma Chem Private Limited to Bangkok and
Thailand.      Upon local examination by the concerned authorities, the
shipment was found containing contraband substance of Ketamine.


8.      The Applicant herein was the Director of the Company namely M/s
Megashri Agri Pharma since July 2023. The material available on record
indicates that the other co-accused namely Bharatsinh Kanaksinh Jadeja
had shared the process for manufacture of the contraband to the present
Applicant. The record also indicates that a meeting had taken place
between the present Applicant and the other co-accused namely
Nagarajan Darmalingam and other Directors of the Company wherein the
co-accused Nagarajan Darmalingam was permitted to remain present in
the factory premises of the company. The representative of the said
Nagarajan Darmalingam as well as he himself used to remain present and
monitor the manufacturing process. It also appears from the record that
the negotiations as regards price of the product had also taken place
between       the    present Applicant    and    the   co-accused     Nagarajan
Darmalingam. The documents as regards the process for manufacturing


                                   Page 3 of 4
           R/CR.MA/22069/2025                                                             ORDER DATED: 12/08/2026




     of the product was also recovered from the mobile phone of the Applicant
     and several chats between himself and the other co-accused were also
     recovered. The payments for the exports made were received by the
     company from the co-accused Nagarajan Darmalingam through Hawala.


     9.        From the bare perusal of the papers of investigation, it appears that
     the petitioner along with the other co-accused was running a racket for
     manufacturing and export of the contraband substance under the guise of
     the product which the company was licensed to manufacture.                                                         The
     quantity of the contraband substance involved in the case is a commercial
     quantity and therefore the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would
     come into play.


     10.       In view of the aforesaid discussion, no case for exercising
     discretion in favour of the Applicant is made out. Hence, the Application
     is dismissed.



                                                                                              (M. R. MENGDEY,J)

     J.N.W / SB I / 4




Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: JAYANTILAL NARAYAN WAGHELA(HC00178), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 12/08/2026 15:45:40




                                                           Page 4 of 4