SUMAN NAROTTAM SHARMAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

P.H. JAYANI                                              07 BA2356.2026.DOC


        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
             CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2356 OF 2026

Suman Narottam Sharma                                    …. Applicant
      V/s.
The State of Maharashtra                                …Respondent


Mr. Ayaz Khan a/w. Mr. Dilip Mishra, Ms. Mallika Sharma i/b.
Ms. Zehra Charania for the Applicant.
Mr. Vinod Chate, APP for the Respondent – State.
Mr. Kishor Kharat, PSI, Dharavi Police Station, present.


                            CORAM:       SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.
                            DATED :      30th SEPTEMBER, 2026

P.C. :-

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

2.        The applicant seeks her release on bail in Special Case
(NDPS) No. 2202 of 2025 pending the City Civil and Sessions
Court, Gr. Mumbai, arising out of Cr.No.360/2025 registered with
Dharavi Police Station, Mumbai for the offences punishable under
Sections 8(c) read with 21, 22 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“NDPS Act”) on the Report
dated 02.05.2025 lodged by Mr. Bhaskar Chavan, PHC.

3.        The prosecution case is that on 02.05.2025, at about 15:25
hours, within Dharavi Police Station area, while Mr. Jatkar, PC
and other police with him including Mr. Koli, PSI were present on
duty, said Mr. Jatkar received a secret information from his source
that the applicant and the co-accused Bharat Sharma were selling
contraband substance ‘MD’ from their residence at Shatabdinagar,
Dharavi. Mr. Jatkar conveyed that information to Mr. Koli, PSI. In

                                Page 1 of 5
P.H. JAYANI                                               07 BA2356.2026.DOC



turn, Mr. Koli reduced that information into writing and
forwarded it to his superiors Mr. Pawar, PI and Sr.P.I. and also to
Assistant Police Commissioner Office, Kurla. The said APC
directed to take an appropriate action and included Mr. Pawar, PI
in that team. It is alleged that, at about 16:55 to 17:05 hours, the
police carried out the raid at the residence of the applicant in the
presence of panchas. The applicant was present there. After initial
legal formalities and serving upon the applicant necessary notice
u/S. 50 of NDPS Act, Mr. Pawar and Mr. Koli inspected the rooms
in the house of the applicant. They found one plastic box in the
inner room which was containing 6 plastic packets each
containing 100 grams of MD. In the outer room they found two
transparent plastic packets of same contraband weighing 32 grams
and 24 grams respectively. Said substance was seized and a
panchanama was recorded. Accordingly, present crime was
registered and the applicant came to be arrested. On completion of
the investigation, police submitted the charge-sheet showing the
co-accused as wanted.

4.       Record indicates that, initially, the applicant had applied for
bail during pendency of the investigation and on its rejection, filed
BA/2935/2025 before this Court. On that occasion, after hearing
the submissions and upon a prima facie consideration of the
material on record, this Court was not inclined to grant the relief
as prayed. Therefore, the then learned Advocate appearing for the
applicant, sought permission to withdraw that application and on
the grant of such permission, the application was withdrawn.

5.       Mr. Khan, the learned Counsel for the applicant submitted
that on receipt of the charge-sheet, it appeared that, this is a case
of non-compliance of Section 42 of NDPS Act, which fact, the


                                Page 2 of 5
P.H. JAYANI                                            07 BA2356.2026.DOC



applicant was not aware on the earlier occasions when she had
sought for bail before the trial Court as well as before this Court.
Therefore, non-compliance of Section 42 is a new ground and, it
entitles the applicant to be released on bail.

6.       Mr. Chate, the learned APP on the other hand submitted
that, there is a proper compliance of Section 42 of the NDPS Act.
Whatever discrepancies in that regard have been pointed out on
behalf of the applicant, same are the aspects to be dealt with at the
time of trial. The applicant was found in possession of commercial
quantity of the contraband ‘MD’, which she failed to explain. As
such, the rigours of Section 37 of NDPS Act are applicable in this
case, which disqualifies the applicant for bail.

7.       I have considered these submissions. Admittedly, the secret
information was received by Mr. Jatkar. However, Mr. Jatkar did
not record that information into writing. Therefore, question of
compliance of Section 42 (2) of NDPS Act does not arise here.
Although, Mr. Koli, PSI had reduced the alleged secret
information into writing, he had not received that information.
Therefore, compliance of Section 42 of NDPS Act by Mr. Koli is no
compliance in law.

8.       The object of Section 42 NDPS Act is to provide a legal
framework for the entry, search, seizure and arrest of an
individual without a warrant or authorisation in cases of narcotic
drugs, psychotropic substances and controlled substances. This
provision is designated to prevent the destruction of evidence and
enable swift action in drugs related offences. The Section aims to
balance the need for enforcement with the protection of the civil
liberties by imposing mandatory procedural safeguards. In the


                               Page 3 of 5
P.H. JAYANI                                                  07 BA2356.2026.DOC



case in hand, prima facie it appears that the said balance is
completely ignored.

9.       In the wake of the above, prima facie there is a reason to
suspect that the applicant was found in possession of the alleged
commercial quantity of the contraband ‘MD’. The applicant has no
criminal antecedents. Therefore, it is not likely that the applicant
would commit identical offences, if released on bail. Thus, the two
condition of Section 37 of NDPS Act, 1985 can be said to have been
met. As a result, the applicant is entitled for bail. Hence, order :-

         (i)     The applicant - Suman Narottam Sharma be released
         on bail in Special Case (NDPS) No.2202 of 2025 pending on
         the file of learned Special Judge, (NDPS) and Additional
         Sessions Judge, Gr. Mumbai arising out of Cr.No.360/2025
         registered with Dharavi Police Station, Mumbai, on her
         executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one or
         more sureties in the like amount.

         (ii)    The applicant shall mark her attendance at Dharavi
         Police Station, Mumbai on 1st day of a month, in every two
         months, between 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., till conclusion of
         the trial.

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

         (v)     The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution
         evidence and shall not directly or indirectly influence the

                                  Page 4 of 5
               P.H. JAYANI                                                07 BA2356.2026.DOC



                        prosecution witnesses to prevent them from deposing
                        against her.

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

                        (vii)   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.

               10.      Bail Application stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.



                                                  (SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.)

       Digitally
       signed by
       PREETI
PREETI HEERO
HEERO JAYANI
JAYANI Date:
       2026.10.03
       13:32:19
       +0530




                                                 Page 5 of 5