Bombay High Court
RUKSAR AHEMAD HUSAIN BARBHIYA @ RUKSAR AWAIS KHANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- NEELA KEDAR GOKHALE
Holding
The High Court enlarged bail for the applicant, finding no material evidence against her and deeming the co‑accused's statement insufficient to deny bail.
Summary
The applicant, Ruksar Ahemad Husain Barbhiya, was arrested under the NDPS Act based solely on the statement of a co‑accused, Hafizullah Khan, who alleged she dealt in heroin. No narcotic substances were recovered from her person or premises, and the prosecution’s case rests on that testimony. The applicant had three prior NDPS cases, for which she was already out on bail, and she is a 35‑year‑old mother of three minor children. The trial court had rejected her earlier bail plea, prompting this appeal to the High Court. The bench, noting the lack of material evidence against her and considering her personal circumstances, held that there was insufficient basis to deny bail and ordered her release on bail with standard conditions. The order emphasized that the observations were prima facie and the trial court would decide the case on its merits.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in an NDPS case where the only evidence against the accused is the testimony of a co‑accused and no contraband has been seized.
- Whether the applicant's prior NDPS antecedents preclude the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(b), 22(b), 29, 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- co‑accused testimony
- drug offences
- prior criminal antecedents
- gender considerations
- criminal procedure
Judgment
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 14_BA_4885_2025.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.4885 OF 2025
Ruksar Ahemad Husain Barbhiya @ Ruksar …Applicant
Awais Khan
Versus
State of Maharashtra …Respondent
Mr. Vikas Shinde, for the Applicant.
Ms. Poonam P. Bhosale, APP for the Respondent - State.
PSI – Mahesh Anjanwad, Shivajinagar Police Station, Mumbai,
present.
CORAM DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.
DATED: 08TH JANUARY 2026
PC:-
1. By this Application, the Applicant seeks her
enlargement on bail in connection with C.R. No. 600 of 2025
dated 8th August, 2025 registered with the Shivaji Nagar
Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections
8(c), 20(b), 22(b) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS’). There
are in all six accused persons involved in the present case.
Page 1 of 7
th
8 January 2026
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 14_BA_4885_2025.doc
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 8 th
August, 2025, the police officials of the concerned police
station set out on patrolling duty. During patrolling, they
found three persons loitering suspiciously. One of them was
holding a black polythene bag, another was holding a yellow
plastic bag and one more person was with them. Upon
interrogation, it transpired that the bags contained cough
syrup having codeine phosphate in commercial quantity. After
following the due procedure prescribed under the NDPS Act,
all three persons were arrested. They were identified as Hanif
Abdul Gafur Khan, Mohd. Ayaz Mohd. Sabuddin Khan and
Nisar Ahmed Hinayat Khan.
3. During interrogation, they revealed the name of
another dealer, namely Hafizullah Khan, who was
subsequently arrested. Upon his interrogation, Hafizullah
Khan stated that his wife was also helping him in selling
cough syrup. He also stated that he was also purchasing
Heroin from the present Applicant namely, Ruksar. Thus, on
Page 2 of 7
th
8 January 2026
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 14_BA_4885_2025.doc
the basis of his statement, the Applicant was also arrested on
14th August, 2024, pursuant to registration of the FIR.
4. The Applicant made an application seeking bail
before the Mumbai Sessions Court (NDPS), 42 nd Additional
Sessions Judge, however, by order dated 20th December, 2025,
the said Application was rejected, hence, the Applicant has
filed the present Bail Application for the reliefs as prayed.
5. Mr. Shinde, learned counsel for the Applicant,
submits that it is only on the statement of the co-accused i.e.
Hafizullah Khan, that the Applicant has been arrested. Her
house was searched. Her personal search was also conducted.
However, nothing was recovered from the present Applicant.
He submits that save and except the statement of the co-
accused, there is no material against the present Applicant. He
thus, prays that the Applicant be enlarged on bail.
6. Ms. Bhosale, learned APP representing the State,
at the outset, states that there are three criminal antecedents
Page 3 of 7
th
8 January 2026
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 14_BA_4885_2025.doc
of NDPS Act itself against the present Applicant. However, she
concedes that nothing was recovered from her premises or her
person. She submits that the entire gang is dealing in drugs
and although the three accused were found with codeine
phosphate cough syrup, it is the co-accused, Hafizullah Khan,
who revealed that it was the present Applicant who was
selling Heroin for further distribution. She submits that the
offence is serious and there is concerted action of selling
Ganja, Codeine Phosphate and Charas. In these circumstances,
she submits that the Application be rejected.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record of the case with their assistance.
8. Admittedly, there is nothing recovered from the
person of the present Applicant. Save and except the
statement of co-accused, Hafizullah Khan, there is no material
on record to indicate complicity of the present Applicant in
the present case. In these circumstances, prima facie I am of
the view that there is reason to believe that the Applicant may
Page 4 of 7
th
8 January 2026
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 14_BA_4885_2025.doc
not have committed the said offence. Admittedly, there are
three criminal antecedents against the Applicant, but she is on
bail in all the three cases. Since her complicity in the present
offence is suspect, and that the Applicant is a lady aged 35
years, having three minor children, 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.35,000/ 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., till the charges are framed;
Page 5 of 7
th
8 January 2026
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 14_BA_4885_2025.doc
iv) If the Applicant has not deposited her
passport, if any, the Applicant shall deposit the same
with the Police Station concerned;
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 her 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;
Page 6 of 7
th
8 January 2026
Prasad Rajput
(P.A.) 14_BA_4885_2025.doc
ix) Any infraction of the aforesaid conditions
shall entail cancellation of bail.
9. Application is allowed in the above terms and is
accordingly disposed of.
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 7 of 7
th
8 January 2026
Checking your session…