Bombay High Court
NITIN LIMBAJI KANDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
- Bench
- ABHAY S WAGHWASE
Holding
The court held that lack of proper segregation of the seized narcotic and the accused's non‑ownership of the premises, coupled with no criminal antecedents, justify granting bail despite the quantity seized.
Summary
The applicant, Nitin Limbaji Kande, was arrested on 4 March 2026 for alleged offences under Sections 8(c) and 20 of the NDPS Act after a large quantity of ganja was seized from a room he occupied, which he claimed was owned by a neighbour. He argued that the seizure was improper because the contraband was mixed with leaves and flowers, there was no segregation, and he was not the owner of the premises; he also highlighted the absence of any criminal antecedents. The State opposed bail, citing the large quantity seized and a positive CA report. The Court observed that the inventory showed no segregation, the applicant was not the owner of the room, the charge had not yet been framed and there was uncertainty about the trial commencement, and there were no antecedents, concluding that continued detention served no purpose. Accordingly, the bail application was allowed, releasing the applicant on a personal bond of Rs.15,000 with conditions to not tamper with evidence, remain within the jurisdiction, and attend all court dates.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted under the NDPS Act when the seized narcotic material is not properly segregated and the accused is not the owner of the premises.
- Whether the quantity of narcotic seized and a positive CA report preclude the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20, 2(iii)(b), 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- narcotic seizure
- ownership of premises
- segregation of evidence
- criminal antecedents
- personal bond
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:27321
{1} BA 1099 OF 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1099 OF 2026
Nitin Limbaji Kande ….Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Another …..Respondents
…..
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Sudarshan J. Salunke
APP for Respondents : Mrs. Ashlesha S. Deshmukh
…..
CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.
Reserved on : 09.07.2026
Pronounced on : 10.07.2026
ORDER :
1. Applicant seeks grant of regular bail on account of his arrest in
Crime No.67 of 2026 registered at Bardapur Police Station, District
Beed, for offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 20 of the Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [NDPS Act].
2. Pointing to the date of arrest as 04.03.2026, it is pointed out
that there is false implication as, according to learned counsel, the
contraband ganja was seized from a room which is not owned by the
applicant, but it is owned by his neighbour. That, in fact, applicant is
resident of Pune. He further submitted that, even there are lapses
while carrying out inventory and weight, as there is no segregation
{2} BA 1099 OF 2026
and along with leaves, flowers are weighed. Therefore, the
contraband ganja does not fall in the definition as provided in
Section 2(iii)(b) of the NDPS Act. That, now investigation is over and
Chargesheet is already filed in May 2026. There are no criminal
antecedents and as applicant is ready to abide any condition imposed
by this Court, learned counsel urges for bail.
3. Learned APP opposed on the ground that huge quantity has
been seized and moreover, CA report is positive.
4. After considering above submissions and taking into account
the papers, it emerges that, acting on secret information, police of
Ambajogai S.D.P.O. office paid visit to the field of Bhaskar Rokdiba
Phad and according to informant-a police official, seeing police arrive
one per was seen fleeing. When visit was paid to a room in the field,
present applicant was found inside it. Statement is made across the
bar that, applicant is not the owner of field or the room in which
contraband was found. Learned APP did not refute or deny such
assertion. Further, inventory drawn by the learned Magistrate, of
which copy is placed with chargesheet, shows that along with the
weight ganja, green leaves were found in two gunny bags. Therefore
{3} BA 1099 OF 2026
there being no segregation, question of provisions of NDPS Act arises.
Now chargesheet is filed. No purpose would be served by further
detention, as charge is not framed and there is uncertainty over
commencement of trial. There are no criminal antecedent. Taking
above circumstances into account, relief as prayed deserves to be
granted. Hence, I proceed to pass the following order:
ORDER
I. The application is allowed.
II. Applicant - Nitin Limbaji Kande be released on bail in
connection with Crime No.67 of 2026 registered at Bardapur
Police Station, District Beed, on executing Personal Bond of
Rs.15,000/- with one surety in the like amount, on the following
conditions:
[a] The applicant shall not tamper prosecution evidence.
[b] The applicant shall not leave the area of jurisdiction of the
concerned police station till conclusion of trial.
[d] The applicant shall regularly attend each and every
effective date before the trial court.
[ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.]
vre
Checking your session…