Bombay High Court
HEMANT JAYANTIBHAI PATELversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- NEELA KEDAR GOKHALE
Holding
Bail was granted because the prosecution failed to produce material evidence of the applicant's complicity and his sole antecedent did not justify denial of bail.
Summary
The applicant, Hemant Jayantibhai Patel, was arrested as accused No.19 in a drug‑related case involving 26 persons, based solely on statements of co‑accused and a witness that he facilitated a cash transfer of Rs.30 lakh as an Angadia. No narcotic contraband or other material linking him to the alleged drug cartel was recovered, and he has only one prior criminal antecedent related to money transfers. The applicant sought bail after a lower court denied it, arguing lack of evidence and prolonged custody. The State contended that his role in hawala transactions sufficed for incarceration. The High Court observed the absence of substantive evidence of complicity and deemed the sole antecedent insufficient to deny bail, concluding there was no reasonable ground to believe he committed the offence. Consequently, the court granted bail with standard conditions and disposed of the application.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant should be granted bail despite being charged under Sections 27A and 29 of the NDPS Act based only on testimonial evidence.
- Whether the applicant's role as an Angadia facilitating cash transfers constitutes sufficient ground to deny bail.
- Whether the existence of a single prior criminal antecedent warrants continued detention.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 255, 336(3), 338, 340(2)
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 27A, 29
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- Angadia
- cash transfer
- drug cartel
- prima facie
- bail conditions
Judgment
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 1_BA_3583_2025.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.3583 OF 2025
Hemant Jayantibhai Patel …Applicant
Versus
State of Maharashtra …Respondent
Mr. Manoj Mohite a/w Hrutik R. Chavan and Dulraj Jain i/by
Shrey S. Lodha, for the Applicant.
Ms. Megha S. Bajoria, APP for the Respondent - State.
Mr. Sandip Nigade, ANC, New Mumbai, present.
CORAM DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.
DATED: 13TH JANUARY 2026
PC:-
1. By these Applications, the Applicants seek their
enlargement on bail in connection with C.R. No. 0201 of 2025
dated 15th April, 2025 registered with the Nerul Police Station,
for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(A)
(B), 21(a), 23(a), 23(b), 27A and 29 and of the Narcotic Drug
and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS’) and
Sections 338, 336(3), 340(2) and 255 of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’). However, the Applicant is charged only
under Sections 27A and 29 of the NDPS Act.
Page 1 of 8
th
13 January 2026
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 1_BA_3583_2025.doc
2. The facts of the case, in brief, as discerned from
the FIR are that there are in all 26 accused persons involved
in the present case. The Applicant is Accused No.19. The
Applicant is arrested on the basis of the statement given by
Accused No.17 namely, Navin Gurunath Chichkar and one
Lalubhai Lilabhai Desai, who is a witness in the said offence.
The role of the Applicant is that he was engaged in the
business of transferring money and basically working as an
Angadia. Lalubhai Desai’s statement against the present
Applicant is that the Applicant was known to him for the past
five years since they shared adjoining office. It is stated that in
January, 2025, the witness telephoned the present Applicant
and sought his services to transfer certain money to the co-
accused Prabhat Pandey and Sujit Bangera. Accordingly, the
witness facilitated a transfer of Rs. 30,00,000/- which he took
from Prabhat Pandey and Sujit Bangera and transferred to the
present Applicant. He stated that he is not aware as to what
the present Applicant did with the said money. The Applicant
Page 2 of 8
th
13 January 2026
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 1_BA_3583_2025.doc
was implicated in the present offence on the basis of the said
statement. The Applicant was arrested on 16th June, 2025.
3. The Applicant made an application seeking bail
before the Additional Sessions Judge, Belapur, however, by
order dated 4th September, 2025, the said application was
rejected. Hence, the Applicant has filed the present Bail
Application for the reliefs as prayed.
4. Mr. Manoj Mohite, learned Senior Counsel
appearing for the Applicant, submits that there is no recovery
made from the Applicant. The only statement against him was
that of the co-accused who has also stated that transfer of
cash from one person to another was facilitated by the present
Applicant. The other statement of one witness namely,
Lalubhai Lilabhai Desai who has also stated that he was aware
that some money transactions were made by the Applicant
with some of the accused. He submits that there is no other
material on record the implicate the present Applicant in the
alleged offence. He further submits that the Applicant is in
Page 3 of 8
th
13 January 2026
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 1_BA_3583_2025.doc
custody since 16th June, 2025, and no purpose will be served
by continuing his incarceration. He thus, prays that the
Applicant be enlarged on bail.
5. Ms. Megha Bajoria, learned APP representing the
State, submits that this is a drug cartel nexus between the co-
accused which are 26 in number and the present Applicant is
one of them. She submits that there is one criminal
antecedent against the present Applicant. She submits that
although no contraband was recovered from the present
Applicant, his role of facilitating cash transfers through
hawala is sufficient to incriminate the present Applicant in the
said offence. She submits that the Applicant is in custody only
for few months, the maximum punishment being 10 to 20
years, this is not a case of long incarceration. She thus, prays
that the application be rejected.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the respective
parties and perused the record of the case with their
assistance.
Page 4 of 8
th
13 January 2026
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 1_BA_3583_2025.doc
7. Admittedly, there is nothing recovered from the
present Applicant. Save and except the money transferred by
him to the co-accused, there is no material to demonstrate his
complicity in the said offence. Admittedly, there is only one
antecedent against the present Applicant. The said antecedent
is also related to transfer of money to persons connected with
the similar offence and that the Applicant was working in his
capacity as an Angadia. There is no other antecedent against
him under the NDPS Act or any other offence. Apart from the
statement of the co-accused as well as the said witness, both
of whom state that the role of the Applicant is facilitating cash
transfers, there is no material on record to establish the
Applicant’s complicity in the alleged drug cartel. In these
circumstances, there is a reasonable ground to believe that the
Applicant has not committed the offence as alleged and it is
not likely that he will repeat the said acts.
8. In view of the aforesaid, I am inclined to enlarge
the Applicant on bail. It is accordingly ordered as under:-
Page 5 of 8
th
13 January 2026
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 1_BA_3583_2025.doc
ORDER
i) The Applicant be enlarged on bail, on
executing PR Bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with
one or two local sureties in the like amount;
ii) The Applicant shall attend the Police Station
concerned, on first Monday of every month between
10:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m., till the charges are
framed. He shall also attend the Trial Court
concerned on each and every date as directed, till the
conclusion of the trial, save and except if the
Applicant is exempted from appearance by orders of
the Trial Court;
iii) If the Applicant has not deposited his
passport, the Applicant shall deposit the same with
the concerned Police Station, if any;
iv) The Applicant shall not leave India, without
the permission of the Trial Court;
Page 6 of 8
th
13 January 2026
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 1_BA_3583_2025.doc
v) The Applicant shall not tamper or attempt to
influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or
any person concerned with the case;
vi) The Applicant shall inform his latest place of
residence and mobile contact number immediately
after being released and / or change of residence or
mobile details, if any, from time to time to the Court
seized of the matter and to the Investigating Officer
of the concerned Police Station;
vii) The Applicant to co-operate with the conduct
of the trial; and
viii) Any infraction of the aforesaid conditions
shall entail cancellation of bail.
9. Application is allowed in the above terms and is
accordingly disposed of.
Page 7 of 8
th
13 January 2026
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 1_BA_3583_2025.doc
10. It is made clear that the observations made herein
are prima facie and are confined to this Application and the
learned Trial Judge to decide the case on its own merits,
uninfluenced by the observations made herein.
(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J)
Page 8 of 8
th
13 January 2026
Checking your session…