Bombay High Court
LILU PRADHAN @ NILU SUHAS PRADHANversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- NEELA KEDAR GOKHALE
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the applicant as there is no prima facie evidence of his involvement in the alleged narcotics offence.
Summary
The applicant, accused No.4 in a narcotics case involving 48 kg of ganja seized from a bus, was arrested based on statements of co‑accused but no contraband or incriminating material was recovered from him or his premises. He has been in custody for over a year without charges being framed. The applicant sought enlargement of bail, arguing lack of evidence linking him to the offence, while the prosecution relied on his alleged role as a supplier and bank transactions showing cash deposits. The court noted the absence of any seized narcotics from the applicant, no direct link between his bank deposits and the drug offence, and his clean antecedents, concluding that prima facie there is no basis to deny bail. Accordingly, the court granted bail with a cash bond and several conditions, emphasizing that the decision is limited to the bail application and the trial court will determine guilt on merits.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused under the NDPS Act when no narcotics or related evidence have been recovered from him.
- Whether the applicant's bank transactions constitute sufficient grounds to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(b)(ii)(C), 27(a), 28, 29, 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- narcotics
- no contraband recovered
- bank transactions
- pre‑trial detention
- bail conditions
Judgment
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 15_BA_3608_2025.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.3608 OF 2025
Lilu Pradhan @ Nilu Suhas Pradhan …Applicant
Versus
The Union of India and Anr. …Respondents
Mr. Kamlesh M. Satre, for the Applicant.
Ms. Manisha S. Jagtap, Spl. PP for the Respondent No.1 –
NCB.
Ms. Poonam P. Bhosale, APP for the Respondent No.2 – State.
CORAM DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.
DATED: 17TH FEBRUARY 2026
PC:-
1. By this Application, the Applicant seeks his
enlargement on bail in connection with C.R. No.23 of 2024
dated 23rd October, 2024 registered with the Narcotics
Control Bureau (NCB), Mumbai Zonal Unit, Mumbai, for the
offences punishable under Sections 8(c) read with Section
20(b)(ii)(C), 27(a), 28 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS’). In all
there are five accused persons involved in the present offence.
The applicant is Accused No.4.
Page 1 of 7
th
17 February 2026
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 15_BA_3608_2025.doc
2. The brief facts of prosecution the case are that the
officials of NCB Zonal Unit, Mumbai received intelligence that
two persons namely Deepak Biswal and Samir Kanhar were
traveling in a bus, coming from Odisha heading to Mumbai,
carrying substantial quantity of ganja. Acting on the said
information, the NCB officials intercepted the bus. After
complying with the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act,
searched the bus and the accused and recovered 48 Kgs of
ganja. Both the Accused Nos.1 and 2 were arrested. Upon
further investigation of these two accused, Deepak Biswal
revealed the name of Accused No.3 namely, Prashant Nayak as
the person who was to receive the said contraband. Based on
this information, the said statement, Accused No.3 Prashant
Nayak was arrested who in turn revealed his involvement in
procurement, transport and selling of ganja. On a disclosure
statement of Accused No.3, the present Applicant was
arrested.
Page 2 of 7
th
17 February 2026
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 15_BA_3608_2025.doc
3. Mr. Satre submits that nothing was recovered from
either the person of the Applicant or from his premises. He
further submits that the Applicant was arrested since he was
in touch with other accused. The investigation revealed
certain UPI and bank transactions. The Applicant was arrested
on 3rd November 2024 and is in jail since then. No charges are
framed till date. He thus, prays that the Applicant be enlarged
on bail.
4. Per contra, Ms. Jagtap, learned Spl. PP brought to
my attention the averments made by the Sub-inspector, NCB,
in his affidavit dated 4th December, 2025 affirmed before the
Notary Public. She submits that since the Applicant’s name
was revealed by Accused No.3 - Prashant Nayak, as being
supplier of ganja to various customers, he is implicated in the
alleged offence. She further brings to my attention the bank
transactions which reveal that he has deposited cash in his
own account. According to Ms. Jagtap, this clearly establishes
his role as a distributor of ganja, procured from other accused
Page 3 of 7
th
17 February 2026
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 15_BA_3608_2025.doc
for cash, which he deposited in his own account. In these
circumstances, Ms. Jagtap resists the bail.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective
parties and perused the record of the case with their
assistance.
6. Admittedly, no contraband was recovered from the
present Applicant nor from his premises. The Applicant was
arrested on 3rd November 2024 and has suffered incarceration
for one year and three months without the charges being
framed. Save and except bank statement showing cash
deposits made in his account by Applicant himself, there is no
link to the said amount to drug related offence. In these
circumstances and in the facts of the present case, prima facie
there is a reason to believe that the Applicant has not
committed the alleged offence. Moreover, there are no
antecedents against the present Applicant, it is unlikely that
he would commit a similar offence if released on bail.
Page 4 of 7
th
17 February 2026
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 15_BA_3608_2025.doc
7. Hence, I am inclined to enlarge the Applicant on
bail. It is accordingly ordered as under:-
ORDER
i) The Applicant be enlarged on bail, on
executing PR Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/ with
one or two local sureties in the like amount;
ii) The Applicant shall attend the Trial Court
concerned on each and every date unless exempted
by the orders of the Trial Court concerned;
iii) The Applicant shall also attend the Police
Station concerned once in a month between 11:00
a.m. to 02:00 p.m.;
iv) If the Applicant has not deposited his passport
he shall deposit the same with the Police Station
concerned;
Page 5 of 7
th
17 February 2026
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 15_BA_3608_2025.doc
v) The Applicant shall not leave India, without
the permission of the Trial Court;
vi) The Applicant shall not tamper or attempt to
influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or
any person concerned with the case;
vii) The Applicant shall inform his latest place of
residence and 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 Police Station concerned;
viii) The Applicant to co-operate with the conduct
of the trial;
ix) Any infraction of the aforesaid conditions
shall entail cancellation of bail.
Page 6 of 7
th
17 February 2026
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 15_BA_3608_2025.doc
8. Application is allowed in the above terms and is
accordingly disposed of.
9. 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 7 of 7
th
17 February 2026
Checking your session…