Bombay High Court
POOJA LOVEPREET LALversusTHE UNION OF INDIA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The court granted interim bail for eight months on humanitarian grounds, subject to stringent conditions, without prejudice to the prosecution’s case.
Summary
Pooja Lovepreet Lal, a first‑time offender, was arrested for possession of 6 kg of cocaine under several provisions of the NDPS Act. After giving birth prematurely, her infant required prolonged NICU care for respiratory distress. The applicant sought bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, while the prosecution invoked the stringent bail restrictions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The court, noting the infant’s critical health, the applicant’s lack of prior record, and humanitarian considerations, granted interim bail for eight months with strict conditions, without addressing the merits of the criminal charge.
Issues considered
- Whether bail may be granted under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 despite the stringent provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
- Whether humanitarian grounds, specifically the health of the applicant’s newborn, outweigh the prosecution’s concerns of flight risk or tampering.
- Whether the applicant poses a risk of re‑offending or influencing witnesses.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 21(c), 23(c), 28, 29, 30, 35, 37, 54 read with 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- humanitarian grounds
- infant health
- Section 37
- Section 483
- legal aid
- drug trafficking
- mother and child in prison
Judgment
36.BA.3454.2026.doc
HARSHADA H. SAWANT
(P.A.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.3454 OF 2026
Pooja Lovepreet Lal .. Applicant
Versus
Union of India .. Respondent
....................
Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Advocate for Applicant appointed through
legal aid.
Mr. Rushikesh Munde, APP a/w. Ms. Shatabdi Netke, Advocate for
Respondent.
Ms. Rajeshree V. Newton, APP for State.
Mr. Sandeep Chavan, Byculla Jail Jailer present.
Mr. Lovepreet Harmesh Lal, husband of Applicant present.
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 28, 2026
P.C.:
1. Heard Mr. Sharma, learned Advocate for Applicant
appointed through legal aid; Mr. Munde, learned SPP for Respondent
and Ms. Newton, APP for State.
2. This is an Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking Bail in connection with DRI/
MZU/C/INT-93/2025 registered with Directorate of Revenue
Intelligence, Mumbai Zonal Unit for offences punishable under
Sections 21(c), 23(c), 28, 29, 30, 35 and Section 54 read with Section
8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for
short ‘the said Act’).
1 of 8
36.BA.3454.2026.doc
3. Applicant is a woman having no antecedents but having
indicted in offences punishable under the said Act wherein she has
been caught with 6 kilograms of contraband-cocaine. After she was
arrested, Applicant was granted interim bail for a period of three
months to deliver the child. On 09.01.2026 she delivered a baby girl
prematurely. The medical reports which is placed on record have been
seen by me. Though this Court is not an expert in medicine but prima
facie reading of the report clearly shows that the infant child which
was born has a documented neo-natal history of respiratory distress
and bronchopneumonia which requires prolonged NICU treatment.
Such treatment was given to the infant but after three months the
Applicant surrendered to the prison alongwith the child and since then
she has been housed in prison alongwith her baby.
4. Mr. Munde would persuade me to take on record material,
appended to be affidavit-in-reply dated 16.09.2026 and would contend
that considering the rigors of Section 37 of the said Act which would
be attracted in the present case, there is no reasonable ground to
believe that the Applicant is not guilty of the alleged offence and,
therefore, consideration of the Applicant's case on humanitarian
grounds be rejected.
5. He would submit that every week the Applicant and her
infant child is referred to the hospital for treatment and after having
2 of 8
36.BA.3454.2026.doc
been discharged from the hospital due to complications there is no
recent medical history demonstrating a continuous illness to enable the
Applicant to maintain the present Application.
6. Though there is a substantial case otherwise made out
which can be gone into on merits, in the present scheme of things, I am
inclined to consider the request made by the Applicant for grant of bail
on humanitarian grounds for more than one reason. Applicant’s
indictment as can be seen is based on statements by witnesses and
other accused persons about Applicant’s involvement earlier but she
has not been indicted in any antecedent offences earlier which prima
facie satisfies one of the rigors of Section 37 of the said Act especially
in the facts and circumstances of the present case where the Applicant
is now required to provide care for her infant baby.
7. Mr. Munde would also submit that the Applicant is part of an
international drug syndicate and has been a very trustworthy member
of the said syndicate and has been an expert in drug smuggling which
is prima facie seen from several witness statements taken recorded by
the prosecution.
8. In so far as the present case is concerned, the same turns on
its facts. The fact that the newborn infant is having a continuous illness
is clearly seen on the basis of the infant having suffered a lower
respiratory tract infection requiring medication and nebulization
3 of 8
36.BA.3454.2026.doc
continuously and therefore, in the month of July-2026 onwards the
infant baby girl was admitted to hospital for breathlessness, fever and
acute respiratory symptoms.
9. Considering that Applicant is woman and in the facts of the
above case where she is required to provide acute care and support to
the infant child and she herself is required to take care of her own
physiological self which is prima facie seen from the medical report
which is placed before me as also, she is required to have an extra
medical diet.
10. The case of prosecution is that she will be regularly sent for
follow-up to J.J. Hospital alongwith the infant child will be adhered to
needs to be intervened by this Court. The medical reports which are
prima facie placed before me, clearly bear out the status of the infant
girl child which by any human consideration needs to be protected
rather provided with proper medical care.
11. Though Mr. Munde would persuade me that she will be
taken well care of in the jail barracks and the hospital, I am unable to
the convince myself to the contrary. Mr. Munde has argued the matter
to the extent of all submissions made in the affidavit-in- reply qua the
rigours of Section 37 of the said Act. However, the issue of the
Applicant re-offending herself especially when she is required to
provide care and support for her infant girl child is considered in the
4 of 8
36.BA.3454.2026.doc
realm of welfare and development needs of children residing with
incarcerated mothers, as opined by the Supreme Court in the case of R.
D. Upadhyay vs. State of A.P.1.
12. Though it is true that the State is required to provide care
within the prison and it may not be understood as creating an absolute
right for the mother to be enlarged on bail much less in derogation of
the statutory embargo under Section 37 of the said Act, it should all
depend and boil down to the facts of each and every particular case
which may not be alike.
13. In the present case where admittedly the health of the
newborn infant is critical it would be more appropriate if the infant is
brought up in the environs of the home and proper hospital care rather
than jail especially when the infant is required to be repeatedly taken
for medical checkups and care.
14. Needless to state that the anxiety expressed by the
prosecution can be considered with appropriate, stringent conditions.
In that view of the matter, the learned Sessions Court order dated
07.08.2026 denying bail on the basis of the jail report that proper
medical facilities, regular checkups and nutritious food are provided
for mothers and children in the prison and that they are referred to J.J.
Hospital for further treatment as and when required may not be
1 2006 (3) SCC 422
5 of 8
36.BA.3454.2026.doc
applicable directly to the facts and circumstances of the Applicant
before me, in view of the precarious condition of her infant daughter
who is 8 months old and who requires medical attention. In that view
of the matter, I am inclined to grant interim bail to the Applicant for a
period of 8 months from today, on the following terms and conditions:
(i) Applicant is directed to be immediately released
from prison for a period of 8 months from today
in connection with Crime No.DRI/ MZU/C/INT-
93/2025;
(ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on
furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen
Thousand only) with one or two surety / sureties
of the like amount;
(iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer
at the concerned Police Station, once every month
on the first Monday of the month between 10:00
a.m. to 12:00 p.m.;
(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 she does so it will
entitle the prosecution to apply for revocation of
6 of 8
36.BA.3454.2026.doc
this order;
(v) Applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra
without prior permission of the Trial Court;
(vi) Applicant shall not influence any of the witnesses
or tamper with the evidence in any manner;
(vii) Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer
informed of her 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.
(ix) Applicant shall surrender after the interim
bail period is over in accordance with law.
15. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are
limited for the purpose of granting interim Bail only and I have not
made any observations on merits of the case. The trial shall be
adjudicated on the strength of the evidence led and strictly on its own
merits being uninfluenced with any of the prima facie observations
made hereinabove in this order.
16. This Court appreciates the assistance rendered by Mr.
Sharma, learned appointed Advocate through the legal aid. His fees be
7 of 8
36.BA.3454.2026.doc
paid by the High Court Legal Aid Services Authority as per rules on
production of a server copy of this order and other compliances in
accordance with the decision of this Court in the case of Sanjyot Nitin
Telharkar v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. 2 and the Schedule under
Regulation 18(1) of the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority
Rules, 1998.
17. Bail Application is allowed and disposed of in the above
terms.
H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally signed
HARSHADA by HARSHADA
HANUMANT
HANUMANT SAWANT
SAWANT Date: 2026.09.28
15:56:55 +0530
2 Judment dated 25.09.2024 passed in Misc. Civil Application No.134 of 2024.
8 of 8
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.