Bombay High Court
MANGESH MADHUKAR BILLAREversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The bail application is allowed, and the applicant is released on bail with specified conditions.
Summary
The Bombay High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by Mangesh Madhukar Billare, who had been incarcerated for 1 year and 11 months on NDPS offences. The applicant argued that the prosecution had violated Section 42(2) and Section 52A of the NDPS Act by failing to record the informant’s identity, improperly handling the seized substance, and not conducting an independent weighing of the contraband. He also pointed out non‑compliance with Rule 13 of the NDPS Rules, 2022 regarding delayed and improper sealing of the sample. The court examined the discrepancies in the FIR, the description of the seized material, and the procedural lapses, and found merit in the applicant’s contentions. Consequently, the court granted bail subject to stringent conditions, including a bond of Rs. 50,000, regular reporting, and restrictions on leaving the state or tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether the prosecution complied with Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act in recording the informant’s identity and obtaining necessary authorization.
- Whether the seizure and weighing of the alleged 'ganja' complied with Section 52A of the NDPS Act.
- Whether the handling of the sample violated Rule 13 of the NDPS Rules, 2022 concerning timely forwarding and heat‑sealing.
- Whether the description of the seized substance in the FIR matches the statutory definition of 'ganja' under Section 2(b)(i) of the NDPS Act.
- Whether bail should be granted given the procedural irregularities and the length of incarceration.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(b)(ii)(c), 29, 42(2), 52A, 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- procedural compliance
- Section 42(2)
- Section 52A
- NDPS Rules
- contraband definition
- evidence handling
Judgment
27.BA.368.2026.doc
HARSHADA H. SAWANT
(P.A.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.368 OF 2026
Mangesh Madhukar Billare .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
....................
Mr. Ayaz Khan a/w. Ms. Zehra Charania, Ms. Mallika Sharma and
Mr. Dilip Mishra, Advocates for Applicant.
Ms. Anuja S. Gotad, APP for Respondent – State.
PSI / Navesh Nimbalkar, Polladpur Police Station, Raigad.
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : AUGUST 18, 2026
P.C.:
1. Heard Mr. Khan, learned Advocate for Applicant and Ms.
Gotad, learned APP for Respondent.
2. This is an Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking Bail in connection with C.R.
No.80 of 2024 registered with Poladpur Police Station for offences
punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(c) and 29 Narcotic Drugs
and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’).
3. The Applicant is in incarceration for 1 year, 11 months in
offences punishable under the NDPS Act. He was apprehended at a
public location by the prosecution Officer in the car which belonged to
him on receipt of credible information by the police. However, there is
non-compliance of Sections 42(2) of the NDPS Act as averred by
1 of 5
27.BA.368.2026.doc
Applicant.
4. At the outset, Mr. Khan has drawn my attention to page
No.51, which is the information having been received by the senior
superior from the concerned Police Officer receiving the information
for initiating the trap. In that information, it is categorically stated that
credible information was received from a police Informant by Police
Havaldar / 889 – Jitendra Chavan. Copy of the same is appended at
page No.51. The First Information Report (for short ‘FIR’) does not
specifically refer to receipt of information by Jitendra Chavan, but
merely states about the trap which laid by the team for apprehending
the Accused persons. Station Diary entry, which is registered and copy
of which is shown to the Court, appended at page No.62 refers to the
information having been noted down by Krishna Namdev, Head
Constable. There is however no reference to the information having
been received by the concerned Police Havaldar - Jitendra Chavan,
therein.
5. This dichotomy having been noticed, therein, apparently,
and prima facie shows dereliction on the part of the prosecution in
noting down the name of the person who received the first information
and the subsequent authorization required to be sought for the same.
This being the strongest ground argued by Mr. Khan, apart from the
fact that the seized substance was contraband ‘ganja’ and the
2 of 5
27.BA.368.2026.doc
description of the seized contraband in the FIR not being in
consonance with the definition of ‘ganja’ as contemplated by the
provisions of the Section 2(b)(i) of the NDPS Act.
6. The Applicant has also argued non-compliance and violation
of Section 52A of the NDPS Act. Mr. Khan would submit that the
substance - contraband recovered from the car was described as
blackish-green substance purported to be ‘ganja’, without its specific
description at all. He would submit that the CA report prima facie
describes the samples as flowering and fruiting tops, leaves, and stalks,
however the leaves and stalks would not fall within the purview of the
definition of ‘ganja’ as contemplated by the NDPS Act.
7. In that view of the matter, it is the case of Applicant that the
weight of the actual ‘ganja’ to the extent of the flowering and fruiting
tops, has not been done and if at all it had been done, it would fall
below commercial quantity considering the overall weight of the seized
material. Page No.91 of the Application further pertains to non-
compliance of the provisions of Section 52A of the NDPS Act, whereby
the alleged contraband substance has been weighed along with the bag
by the prosecution Officers and there is no independent measurement
of the alleged contraband substance.
8. In that view of the matter, prima facie non-compliance of
Section 42(2) read with 52A of the NDPS Act of the Act has been made
3 of 5
27.BA.368.2026.doc
out by the Applicant for grant of bail. The Applicant has argued non-
compliance of Rule 13 of the NDPS Rules 2022, in there being a
substantial delay of 3 days in forwarding the sample to the CA, so as to
not rule out any tampering with it. He would also submit that the
sample was received in a paper cloth pouch and not heat-sealed as
mandated by the said rule. Considering the total weight of the
contraband being 24.435 kg and the incarceration of the Applicant for
1 year 11 months, and the improbability of the trial being completed in
the near future, the Applicant has made out a case for grant of bail.
9. Considering the aforesaid, Applicant has made out case for
grant of bail subject to following conditions:-
(i) Applicant is directed to be immediately released from
prison in connection with Crime No. 80 of 2024;
(ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on
furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty
Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount;
(iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at
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
4 of 5
27.BA.368.2026.doc
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.
10. Bail Application is allowed and disposed of in the above
terms.
H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally signed
by HARSHADA
HARSHADA HANUMANT
HANUMANT SAWANT
SAWANT Date:
2026.08.18
15:07:37 +0530
5 of 5
Checking your session…