JAYANT S/O. JITENDRAKUMAR TIWARIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

MEERA JADHAV                                             908 BA1269.2026.DOC


      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
           CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

           CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1269 OF 2026
Jayant S/o. Jitendrakumar Tiwari                          …. Applicant

       V/s.
State of Maharashtra                                    …. Respondent


Mr. Keshav Lalchand Damani i/b Sandhya Gaikwad for
the Applicant.
Mr. T. G. Khan, APP for Respondent -State.
Mr. Amol Kadam, PI, present posting EOW, Mumbai, present.


                            CORAM:        SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.
                            DATED :       25th AUGUST, 2026

P.C. :-

1.        Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the record.

2.        The applicant seeks his release on bail in connection with
FIR bearing No.25 of 2022, dated 29th March 2022, registered
with the Anti Narcotic Cell (ANC), Worli Unit, Mumbai for the
offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 22(c), 25, 27-A and 29 of
the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Act, 1985
('NDPS Act’ for short). There are in all twelve accused. The
applicant is original Accused No.12.

3.        The prosecution case is that while on patrolling duty, a team
of ANC, Worli found Accused No.1 in a public place carrying 250
gms MD to sale. Therefore, Accused No.1 was arrested and the
said crime was registered. The investigation led to the arrest of
Accused Nos.2 to 5. Pursuant to the disclosure made by Accused
No.5, about 701 kgs of Mephedrone was recovered from a godown
at Nalasopara. Further, investigation revealed the role of Accused

                                 Page 1 of 4
MEERA JADHAV                                          908 BA1269.2026.DOC



Nos.6 to 12 and, they came to be arrested. On completion of
investigation charge-sheet and supplementary charge-sheet were
filed.

4.       Mr. Damani, learned Counsel for the applicant submits that
at the relevant time, the applicant was working as a Dispatch Head
in the factory where the raid was carried out and contraband was
seized. Accused No.11 – Hareshbhai Bhimajibhai Valani was
working in that factory as an Administrative Head and A11 has
been released on bail by this Court. He submitted that the role of
A11 and the present applicant is similar and, therefore, is entitled
for bail on the principle of parity.

5.       Mr. Khan, learned APP submitted that the applicant
alongwith the co-accused persons were dealing in elicit
contraband MD. Total 2428 kgs MD has been seized in this case.
He submits that the applicant was a Manager and not the Dispatch
Head. However, in the charge-sheet, it is alleged that the applicant
was working as a supplier.

6.       I have considered these submissions. There is no dispute
from the Respondent side that the role of the applicant is similar
to the role of A11 who has been granted bail by this Court on the
ground of prolonged incarceration. The order granting bail to A11
has not been assailed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, thus, the
Respondent has accepted that order. The said order and the order
of granting bail to A5 Premprakash Singh have been based on the
order of bail granted by Hon’ble Apex Court to A10 Chintan
Pansariya on the ground of prolonged incarceration.

         Total 701.740 Kgs MD was recovered from A5. It is alleged
that the license of the factory where the raid was carried, was in

                               Page 2 of 4
MEERA JADHAV                                             908 BA1269.2026.DOC



the name of A10. He had allowed the premises and the machinery
etc. there to A7 who was controller of the factory from whom
1723.250 kg of. MD was recovered.

         More or less, the role attributed to A11 and the applicant is
the same. While granting bail to A10, the Hon’ble Supreme Court
has observed that A10 was in judicial custody as an under trial
prisoner for almost 3½ years. On 16-1-2026, charge came to be
framed. Some of the co-accused were released on bail. The
prosecution intended to examine as many as 159 witnesses. There
are cases almost 10 years old pending in the trial Court. In this
background, despite noting that the alleged offence seriousness,
the Hon’ble Supreme directed to release the Petitioner on bail. The
applicant is being incarcerated for four years which is more than
the period of incarceration considered in the case of A10.

7.       In the wake of the above, the applicant is entitled for bail on
the principle of parity. Thus, I am inclined to allow the
application. Hence, following Order :-

(i)      The applicant – Jayant s/o Jitendrakumar Tiwari shall be
released on bail in connection with FIR bearing No.25 of 2022,
registered with the Anti Narcotic Cell (ANC), Worli Unit, Mumbai
for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 22(c), 25, 27-A
and 29 of the NDPS Act, on his furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of
Rs.2,00,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

(ii)     The applicant shall mark his attendance at Anti Narcotic
Cell (ANC), Worli Unit, Mumbai, on the 1 st day of each calendar
month between 12:00 noon to 4:00 p.m., till the conclusion of the
trial.



                                Page 3 of 4
                      MEERA JADHAV                                           908 BA1269.2026.DOC



                      (iii)   The applicant shall regularly attend the proceedings before
                      the jurisdictional Court unless exempted by the said Court, for the
                      reasons to be recorded in writing.

                      (iv)    On being released from jail, the applicant shall furnish his
                      contact number and residential address to the Investigating
                      Officer and shall keep him updated, in case there is any change.

                      (v)     The applicant shall not indulge in identical activities for
                      which he has been arraigned in this case.

                      (vi)    The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution
                      evidence and shall not directly or indirectly influence upon the
                      prosecution witnesses to prevent them from deposing against him.

                      (vii) The applicant shall surrender his passport with the ANC,
                      Worli Unit.

                      (viii) The applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra till
                      the conclusion of the trial.

                      (ix)    It is clarified that any observation made in the present
                      Order are for the purpose of deciding the present Bail Application
                      and should not influence the outcome of the trial and also not be
                      taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

                      8.      Bail Application stand disposed of in aforesaid terms.


                                                      (SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.)
  PREETI
  HEERO
  JAYANI
Digitally signed by
PREETI HEERO
JAYANI
Date: 2026.08.27
19:38:40 +0530




                                                     Page 4 of 4