Bombay High Court
HANIF ABDUL GAFUR KHANversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The applicant is entitled to bail in the NDPS case, subject to prescribed conditions.
Summary
Hanif Abdul Gafur Khan was arrested for allegedly possessing 11 bottles of codeine phosphate cough syrup, an offence under Sections 8(c), 20(b), 22(b) and 29 of the NDPS Act. He has been in custody for over a year, the charge has not yet been framed and the trial court is vacant, raising concerns of undue delay. The applicant’s counsel argued lack of material proving his presence at the spot and pointed to his prior bail in a separate IPC 307 case, while the State highlighted the commercial quantity of the contraband. The Court noted a prima facie case but, relying on Supreme Court precedents where bail was granted in similar circumstances of large quantities and prolonged incarceration, held that the applicant should be released on bail with conditions. Accordingly, the bail was granted subject to a bond, sureties, regular attendance, and other standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in an NDPS case involving possession of a commercial quantity of narcotic substance.
- Whether the delay in framing charges and the vacancy of the trial court justify bail.
- Whether the applicant’s prior criminal antecedent under IPC Section 307 affects the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(b), 22(b), 29, 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- codeine syrup
- commercial quantity
- trial delay
- prior criminal antecedent
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
WAKLE
MANOJ
JANARDHAN MANOJ 46-BA-2592-2026.DOC
Digitally signed by
WAKLE MANOJ
JANARDHAN
Date: 2026.09.22
19:31:13 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.2592 OF 2026
Hanif Abdul Gafur Khan …Applicant
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra …Respondent
Ms. Afreen Shaikh a/w Ms. Nikhat Shaikh, for the Applicant.
Mr. H.J. Dedhia, APP for the Respondent-State.
Mr. Madhukar L. Moule, Shivaji Nagar Police Station, Mumbai,
present.
CORAM: SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.
DATED : 21st SEPTEMBER, 2026
P.C. :-
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the record.
2. Applicant seeks his release on bail in connection with
Cr.No.600 of 2025, registered with Shivaji Nagar Police Station,
Mumbai for the offence punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b),
22(b) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances
Act, 1985 (“NDPS Act”), on the Report dated 8 th August, 2025 filed
by Mr. Dada Virkar, Police Constable.
3. As alleged, on 08.08.2025, at 00.15 hours, at Govandi, the
applicant and 6 others were found transporting and possessing
different types of illicit narcotic substances. The applicant was
found in possession of 11 bottles, each containing 100 ml codeine
phosphate based cough syrup. Therefore, the applicant and his co-
accused were arrested. On completion of the investigation, charge-
sheet was filed. The bail application filed by the applicant was
rejected by the trial Court.
Page 1 of 4
MANOJ 46-BA-2592-2026.DOC
4. Ms.Shaikh, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that,
there is no material to show that the applicant was present at the
spot, at the time of the alleged chance recovery. The applicant is in
jail for last more than one year. Till the date, charge is not framed.
She submitted that, the applicant has one criminal antecedent
under Section 307 of the IPC, in which he is on bail. Therefore, the
applicant may be released on bail.
5. Mr. Dedhia, learned APP, submitted that, the applicant was
found in possession of commercial quantity of the contraband,
which he has not explained. Therefore, bail be refused.
6. I have considered these submissions. Considering the
material on record, there is a prima facie case against the applicant
of having possessed 11 bottles of the contraband substance.
However, it cannot be ignored that the applicant is behind bars for
last 13 months. Till the date, charge is not framed. Ms. Shaikh,
submitted that, recently, the Presiding Officer of the trial Court is
transferred and the said Court is vacant. As such, the trial is not
likely to commence and conclude within a foreseeable future. In the
previous offence, the applicant is on bail which he has not misused.
7. In the case of MD Ezaz Afzal & Anr. v. State of W.B SLA
(Crl.) 12419/2024, the petitioners were arrested on 10.12.2023 as
1920 bottles of codeine phosphate syrup were seized from them.
The trial was not commenced. No witness was examined, though 14
were cited by the prosecution. Taking note of the quantity of
codeine phosphate syrup allegedly involved in the case and, the
period of incarceration (11 months) already undergone by the
Petitioners, the Hon’ble Supreme Court released them on bail.
In the case of Anandbhai Rajendrabhai Vaniya v. State
of Gujarat, Criminal Appeal No.859/2025 arising out of [SLP
Page 2 of 4
MANOJ 46-BA-2592-2026.DOC
(Crl.) No.17042/2024], as alleged, the appellant was driving the car
from which 995 bottles of RX Codeine Phosphate & Triprolidine
Hydrochloride syrup were seized. The appellant had figured in eight
cases, but, was discharged in five cases, acquitted in two cases and
in the other remaining case, he was on bail. Taking into
consideration the 17 months incarceration of the Applicant, the
nature of allegations levelled against him and, the possibility of the
trial not being concluded anytime soon, the Hon’ble Supreme Court
released the appellant on bail.
8. Therefore, and considering the facts and circumstances of the
case as a whole, the applicant may be released on bail. Hence,
following Order:-
(i) Applicant – Hanif Abdul Gafur Khan shall be released
on bail in connection with Cr.No.600 of 2025, registered
with Shivaji Nagar Police Station, Mumbai, on his furnishing
P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties
in the like amount.
(ii) The applicant shall mark his attendance at Shivaji
Nagar Police Station, Mumbai, on the 1st day of each calendar
month between 12:00 noon to 4:00 p.m., till the 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 tamper with the prosecution
evidence and shall not directly or indirectly influence upon
the prosecution witness to prevent them from deposing
against him.
Page 3 of 4
MANOJ 46-BA-2592-2026.DOC
(v) On being released from jail, the applicant shall furnish
his contact number and residential address to the
Investigation Officer and shall keep him updated, in case
there is any change.
(vi) The applicant shall not indulge in identical activities for
which he has been arraigned in this case.
(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.
9. Application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
(SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.)
Page 4 of 4
Checking your session…