Bombay High Court
SHAIKH AYANUDDIN AZIMUDDINversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Disposal
- APPLICATION ALLOWED
Holding
The Court held that the material on record was insufficient to sustain the applicant's custody and therefore granted bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS by Shaikh Ayanuddin Azimuddin, who was arrested in connection with a narcotics case involving the illegal sale of codeine‑containing cough syrup. The prosecution alleged that the applicant had regular telephone contact and monetary transactions with co‑accused persons, but the only evidence against him was call‑detail records and a CDR report. The applicant argued that there was no direct nexus with the offence and that the NDPS provisions should not apply to him. The Court examined whether such circumstantial material was sufficient to justify continued custody. Finding the material insufficient to establish a prima facie case, the Court allowed the bail application, ordering release on personal bond with standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the telephone call records and monetary transactions constitute sufficient prima facie evidence to justify continued detention under the NDPS Act.
- Whether the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act apply to the applicant in the absence of direct involvement.
- Whether bail can be granted under Section 483 of the BNSS after the charge‑sheet has been filed.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 238
- Drugs and Cosmetics Act — s. 18(c), 27(b)
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — s. 21(b), 22(b), 25, 27(a), 29, 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- drug trafficking
- telephone evidence
- prima facie case
- charge sheet
- regular bail
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:43458
-1-
951-BA-1480-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1480 OF 2026
SHAIKH AYANUDDIN AZIMUDDIN
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
.....
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Abhaysinh K. Bhosle
APP for Respondent - State : Mr. S. V. Hange
.....
CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
DATED : 22nd SEPTEMBER 2026
PER COURT :
1. Heard the learned Advocate for the applicant and the
learned APP for the respondent-State. With the able assistance of
the learned Advocates, I have also perused the entire charge-sheet
and prosecution papers.
2. The present application is filed under Section 483 of the
BNSS, seeking regular bail of the applicant, who was arrested on
25th September, 2025 in connection with FIR bearing No.279 of
2025, registered with Waluj Police Station, District Chhatrapati
Sambhajinagar. The investigation is complete and the charge-sheet
has been filed.
3. Learned Advocate for the applicant submits that, in all
-2-
951-BA-1480-2026
there are 41 accused persons. Out of the said 41 accused persons,
17 persons have been arrested and are in custody, whereas the
other accused persons have not even been arrested.
4. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 12 th
September 2025, lady Police Inspector by name Geeta Bagwade
received secret information pertaining to a racket which was
working for selling intoxicants to young girls and boys illegally. It
was further informed to the said Police Inspector that Avinash
Patil and Rupesh Patil, who are residents of Yeola, had ordered a
consignment of bottles of cough syrup from one Rayyan Medical
Stores, Uttar Pradesh for the purpose of selling and distributing the
same to young girls and boys. The said consignment will reach to
VRL Logistics at Waluj and Avinash Patil would come to the said
VRL Logistics for receiving the consignment. Therefore, the police,
along with the panch witnesses had arranged a trap. It is further
case of the prosecution that when the police along with the panch
witnesses reached near the said VRL Logistics at Waluj and
contacted Mahesh Garad, the Manager of the said logistics
company and informed him about the matter. At about 2:30 p.m.,
one person came to the said VRL Logistics in his Swift car. He
showed the receipt to the Manager on his mobile phone and asked
him to hand over the consignment. Accordingly, the said Manager
-3-
951-BA-1480-2026
handed over the consignment to the said person. Immediately
thereafter, the police came forward and accosted the said person.
On inquiry, the said person disclosed his name as Avinash Patil,
who is a resident of Shirasgaon, Taluka Chalisgaon. He further
disclosed that he along with his associates had called for the said
consignment in the name of the medical shop of Amol Dattatraya
Yeole, which was closed. It was further disclosed by Avinash that
his brother Rupesh Patil is a medical representative of Aristocrat
Company and that they all with the help of some other peddlers of
their gang, were selling and distributing the said syrup illegally to
gain monetary benefits.
5. It is the case of the prosecution that when the police
took search of the said parcel/consignment, they found 20 boxes
containing 128 bottles each of Raytuss syrup. The said cough
syrup was containing Codeine Phosphate & Triprolidine HCI Syrup.
The police seized the said boxes containing the bottles in presence
of panch witnesses and prepared a panchnama to that effect.
6. When the inquiry further proceeded, accused Avinash
Patil further disclosed that his brother Rupesh Patil had asked him
to hand over some boxes to Arshad Pathan, resident of
Sambhajinagar. Sometime thereafter, accused Arshad Pathan,
-4-
951-BA-1480-2026
Samir Sheikh Yunus Sheikh and Abdul Ajim Kadir Shah came
there by auto-rickshaw. Arshad talked with accused Avinash Patil
and told him that Rupesh Patil had asked him to receive the bottles
from Avinash Patil. During further investigation, the name of the
present applicant surfaced and therefore, the present applicant
came to be arrested.
7. Learned Advocate appearing for the applicant submits
that the present applicant has no nexus with the alleged offence.
He argues that the only material that the prosecution could collect
against him pertains to the CDR report and his telephonic contact
with accused Arshad. Apart from this, there is no piece of material
against the present applicant to connect him with the alleged
offence or with the alleged consignment. He submits that there is
also no material to connect the applicant with any allegation that
he is addicted to any kind of drug. He thus submits that the
provisions of NDPS Act are not applicable to the present applicant.
He, therefore, prays that the applicant be released on bail.
8. Learned APP however, opposed the application by
stating that there is ample material against the present applicant
to show that he was in regular contact with accused No.2. He
submits that there is a history of telephone calls with the co-
-5-
951-BA-1480-2026
accused persons and there are also regular phone calls which are
exchanged between the present applicant and the accused persons.
He submits that the nexus can be inferred from the regular contact
maintained by the present applicant with the other accused
persons. He, therefore, prays that the application be rejected.
9. Taking into consideration the submissions advanced by
the learned Advocates and the prosecution material that has been
placed before this Court, it reveals that, during investigation, the
Investigating Officer has collected the bank details, call details,
WhatsApp call records and chatting details of the present applicant
and other accused persons. The prosecution has come to the
conclusion that the present applicant had contacted the other co-
accused persons and there were also some monetary transactions
between them. There had also been regular telephone calls
exchanged at regular intervals. Therefore, taking into
consideration this material and the allegations made against the
present applicant, the present applicant is arraigned as an accused
in the present offence.
10. If this is the only material that has been collected by the
prosecution against the present applicant, then, to my mind, the
Sections Sections 8(c), 21(b), 22(b), 25, 27(a) and 29 of the NDPS
-6-
951-BA-1480-2026
Act and it's applicability will have to be proved by the investigating
agency before the Trial Court.
11. Prima facie, only on the basis of this material, the
present applicant cannot be continued in custody. Mere telephonic
calls between the applicant and the other co-accused persons,
especially accused No.2 alone would not be sufficient to prima facie
hold that the present applicant is involved in the alleged offence
and that his custodial detention should be continued.
12. Taking into consideration that the charge-sheet has
been filed, the investigation is complete and custodial interrogation
of the applicant is not necessary, I am inclined to allow the present
application. Hence, the following order:
ORDER
(i) The Bail Application is allowed.
(ii) The applicant shall be released on bail in Crime No. No.279 of
2025, registered with Waluj Police Station, District
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, for the offences punishable
under Sections 8(c), 21(b), 22(b), 25, 27(a) and 29 of The
Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act and under
section 238 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 18(c)
and 27(b) of The Drugs and Cosmetics Act, on furnishing
personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only)
-7-
951-BA-1480-2026
with one solvent surety in the like amount, subject to the
following conditions :
a) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station
on the first Monday and the last Monday of every
month between 10:00 a.m. and 02:00 p.m. till framing
of charge and thereafter shall regularly attend each
and every effective date before the trial court, unless
their attendance is specifically exempted.
b) The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, contact,
threaten, induce or influence the informant or any
prosecution witness and shall not tamper with the
prosecution evidence.
c) The applicant shall furnish his current residential
address and mobile numbers to the Investigating Officer
and the Trial Court within seven days of release,
intimate any change forthwith, and attend the
Investigating Officer upon prior written notice if further
investigation is required.
d) The applicant shall not leave India without prior
permission of the trial Court and, if he possess passport,
shall deposit the same with the Trial Court within seven
days of his release.
e) The applicant shall not involve themselves in any
offence of a similar nature while on bail.
-8-
951-BA-1480-2026
f) Breach of any of the above conditions shall entitle the
prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail.
g) All observations in this order are prima facie and
confined to the decision of this bail application. The trial
Court shall decide the case independently on the
evidence led before it.
(iii) The Bail Application is disposed of in the above terms.
(HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR)
JUDGE
Tandale
Checking your session…