Bombay High Court
KANAIYYALALA ALIAS KANHA JAGDISHCHANDRA JAT (CHOUDHARI)versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
Holding
The bail application was dismissed as the applicant failed to make out a case for bail under the NDPS Act.
Summary
The applicant, Kanaiyyalala alias Kanha Jagdishchandra Jat, was arrested for offences under Sections 20 and 20(b) of the NDPS Act after Ganja was discovered in his vehicle and he fled the scene of an accident. He filed a bail application, arguing that the charge‑sheet had been filed, the investigation was complete, and that the prosecution had not complied with Sections 42, 50, 52A and 57 of the NDPS Act. The State opposed, contending that the applicant is a habitual offender, the quantity seized exceeds the commercial threshold, and that all mandatory procedural requirements, including Sections 52A and 57, had been satisfied. The Court examined the record, noted that the inventory was prepared and certified, and found that the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act were complied with. Considering the seriousness of the offence, the commercial quantity involved, and the applicant’s conduct, the Court held that the applicant failed to establish a case for bail and dismissed the application.
Issues considered
- The applicability of bail provisions under the NDPS Act for offences under Sections 20 and 20(b) when the seized quantity exceeds commercial quantity.
- Whether the mandatory procedural requirements of Sections 42, 50, 52A and 57 of the NDPS Act have been complied with.
- Whether the applicant’s status as a habitual offender and his act of fleeing the accident preclude the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20, 20(b), 37, 42, 50, 52A, 57
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- narcotic drugs
- commercial quantity
- habitual offender
- Section 37
- mandatory procedures
- bail denial
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:24545
1 of 3 31-BA.586.2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
31 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 586 OF 2026
KANAIYYALALA ALIAS KANHA JAGDISHCHANDRA JAT
(CHOUDHARI)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
...
Mr. Abhijit S. More, Advocate for Applicant.
Mr. S. D. Ghayal, APP for Respondent-State.
...
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 22nd JUNE, 2026
P.C.:-
1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Abhijit S. More for the Applicant
and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. S. D. Ghayal for the
Respondent–State.
2. By the present application, the Applicant seeks his release on
bail in connection with Crime No.344 of 2022 registered with
Anandnagar Police Station, Dharashiv, for the offences punishable
under Sections 20 and 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, 1985 (for short, “the NDPS Act”).
3. As per the prosecution case, Ganja was found in a vehicle
belonging to the present Applicant. It is alleged that when the said
vehicle met with an accident, the Applicant fled from the spot.
Consequently, the aforesaid crime came to be registered against him.
2 of 3 31-BA.586.2026
4. Mr. More, learned Advocate for the Applicant submits that
the charge-sheet has now been filed. He further contends that there is
non-compliance with the provisions of Sections 42, 50, 52A and 57 of
the NDPS Act.
5. He further submits that the investigation is complete and the
charge-sheet has been filed. The Applicant has been behind bars since
09.07.2025 and, therefore, his further detention is not warranted.
6. Per contra, Mr. S. D. Ghayal, learned APP strongly opposes
the application. He submits that the Applicant is a habitual offender
and that a similar offence had earlier been registered against him. He
further submits that the quantity of Ganja recovered from the vehicle
was above the commercial quantity and, therefore, the rigours of
Section 37 of the NDPS Act would apply. He contends that all
mandatory procedures prescribed under the NDPS Act have been duly
complied with, including the requirements under Sections 52A and 57.
He further points out that the charge-sheet has already been filed.
7. I have heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties
and perused the record, including the charge-sheet. The material on
record indicates that the vehicle belonging to the Applicant was found
carrying Ganja and that the Applicant fled from the spot after the
vehicle met with an accident. The record further indicates that the
contraband was found in the conscious possession of the Applicant.
3 of 3 31-BA.586.2026
8. Prima facie, the record reveals compliance with the
mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act. The inventory was also
prepared and certified before the learned Magistrate.
9. Considering the nature of the allegations, the quantity
involved and the material collected during the investigation, I am of
the view that the Applicant has failed to make out a case for grant of
bail.
10. Hence, the application stands dismissed. No order as to costs.
(SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.)
Tauseef
Checking your session…