Bombay High Court
GANESH @ SNEHAL SHIVSAMB BACHEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The court held that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie link of complicity, and therefore bail was granted to the applicant.
Summary
The applicant, accused No.2 in an NDNDPS case, sought bail after being arrested as a pillion rider on a scooter from which MD and ganja were seized from accused No.1. The prosecution relied on the applicant's confiscated phone and WhatsApp chats to invoke the presumption of complicity under Section 35 of the NDPS Act. The defence argued that no direct nexus between the applicant and the seized contraband was established and that the presumption could be rebutted. Citing the decision in Chandrabhan Janardhan Yadav v. State of Maharashtra, the court found the prosecution’s evidence insufficient to link the applicant to the trafficking. Consequently, the court granted bail with a bond of Rs. 25,000 and imposed standard reporting and non‑interference conditions. The bail application was allowed and disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether the presumption of complicity under Section 35 of the NDPS Act can be rebutted in the case of the accused pillion rider.
- Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie link between the applicant and the contraband seized from accused No.1.
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under the NDPS Act given the circumstances.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(b)(ii)(a), 22(c), 29, 35, 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- Section 35
- presumption of complicity
- pillion rider
- contraband
- Maharashtra
- high court
Judgment
14. BA-3140-26.odt
Amberkar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3141 OF 2026
Ganesh @ Snehal Shivsamb Bache .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
....................
Ms. Ashwini B. Jadhav, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. Amit A. Palkar, APP for State
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : AUGUST 18, 2026
P. C.:
1. Heard Ms. Jadhav, learned Advocate for Applicant and Mr.
Palkar, learned APP for State.
2. By this Bail Application, Applicant - accused No. 2 is seeking
enlargement on bail in Crime No. 916 of 2025 registered with
Hadapsar Police Station, Pune City for the offences punishable under
Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(a), 22(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drug and
Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short "NDPS Act").
3. Applicant before me is arraigned as accused No. 2 and indicted
in the crime under the NDPS Act. Case of the prosecution is that
Applicant was a pillion rider along with accused No. 1 Megha and both
of them were apprehended. According to the prosecution, the alleged
contraband substance namely MD and Ganja was recovered from
accused No. 1 Megha only. Since the Applicant was pillion rider on
1 of 4
14. BA-3140-26.odt
Megha’s scooter, he was also apprehended and his phone was
confiscated. Certain conversations in his phone on whatsapp along
with accused No. 2, copy of which is appended at page Nos 282
onwards, is relied upon by the prosecution to indict the Applicant in
the present crime.
4. Learned APP referred to the provisions of Section 35 of NDPS
Act to the extent of showing that Applicant has also complicity in the
present crime. However when Section 35 is read it prima facie states
that defence would be available to the Applicant to show that the
presumption which is drawn by the prosecution can be rebutted. In the
present case, insofar as the indictment of the Applicant is concerned,
there is no nexus whatsoever which is prima facie shown by the
prosecution to the extent of the Applicant being complicit in the
trafficking of the contraband substance which is recovered from
accused No. 1.
5. Statement of accused No. 1 has been recorded separately which
prima facie states that she procured the said contraband from accused
No. 3 – Salman Inamdar. Insofar as the role of accused No. 2 is
concerned, the statement of accused No. 1 is silent. Reliance on the
whatsapp conversation and chart appended at page No 85 does not
throw any alight whatsoever with regard to the contraband which has
been seized from accused No. 1 in the present case.
2 of 4
14. BA-3140-26.odt
6. Arguable case is made out by learned Advocate for Applicant for
grant of bail to the Applicant.
7. Learned Advocate for Applicant also refers to and relies upon
the decision of this Court in the case of Chandrabhan Janardhan
Yadav v. State of Maharashtra1 to the extent of relevancy of linking of
various accused in the crime and more specifically so for the purpose
of consideration. Perused the said decision which gives extensive
directions for the purpose of conducting investigation when multiple
accused are involved in a NDPS crime. Role of the Applicant is
nothing more than the said Applicant being the friend of accused No. 1
and therefore, Applicant is required to be released on bail.
8. In view of the above the following order is passed:-
(i) Applicant is directed to be immediately released from
prison in connection with Crime No. 916 of 2025;
(ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on
furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five
Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount;
(iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at
Hadapsar Police Station, Pune City, once every month
on the first Sunday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to
12:00 p.m.;
1 (2025) 3 High Court Cases (Bom) 171
3 of 4
14. BA-3140-26.odt
(iv) Applicant shall co-operate with the conduct of trial and
attend the Trial Court on all dates, unless specifically
exempted and will not take any unnecessary
adjournments, if he does so it will entitle the
prosecution to apply for revocation of this order;
(v) Applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra
without prior permission of the Trial Court;
(vi) Applicant shall not influence with any of the witnesses
or tamper with the evidence in any manner;
(vii) Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer informed
of his current address and mobile contact number and /
or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from
time to time, as applicable; and
(viii)Any infraction of the conditions shall entail cancellation
of bail granted to the Applicant.
9. Needless to state that the above observations will not come in
the way of trial as they are prima facie in nature based on the
submissions made and the material placed before this Court.
10. Bail Application is allowed and disposed of in the above
terms.
Amberkar [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally signed
by RAVINDRA
RAVINDRA MOHAN
MOHAN AMBERKAR
AMBERKAR Date:
2026.08.18
20:30:54 +0530
4 of 4
Checking your session…