Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

SABERA B RAHIM KHANversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The High Court granted bail to the applicant, enlarging it on the condition of a personal bond and compliance with stipulated conditions.

Summary

The applicant, Sabera B Rahim Khan, was arrested on 27 August 2025 after police recovered 17.329 kilograms of Ganja from her bags on a train. She filed a bail application before the Special NDPS Judge, which was rejected, prompting her to seek enlargement of bail before the Bombay High Court. The counsel for the applicant argued that the quantity was below commercial quantity, that charges had not been framed despite prolonged detention, and that the seized substance was not properly described as Ganja under the NDPS Act. The State contended that electronic evidence linked the applicant to drug peddling but acknowledged her lack of prior convictions. The Court, noting the intermediate quantity, absence of antecedents, and the Supreme Court’s guidance that quantity must be assessed per accused, granted bail with strict conditions.

Issues considered

  • Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite possession of 17.329 kg of Ganja.
  • Whether the seized substance qualifies as 'Ganja' under the NDPS Act given the description in the FIR and seizure panchanama.
  • Whether prolonged pre-charge detention without framing of charges warrants bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • NDPS Act
  • Ganja
  • quantity of narcotics
  • commercial quantity
  • pre-charge detention
  • definition of Ganja
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

Shivgan                                          8-BA-643-2026.doc




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                BAIL APPLICATION NO. 643 OF 2026


Sabera B Rahim Khan                                     …Applicant
      Versus
State of Maharashtra                                    …Respondent


Ms. Zehra Charania, with Ayaz Khan, Dilip Mishra and Mallika
      Sharma, for the Applicant.
Ms. Anuja Sunil Gotad, APP for the Respondent-State.
Mr. Ashok Holkar, PSI attached to Crime Branch, present.


                       CORAM            DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.
                       DATED:           17th FEBRUARY 2026
PC:-


1.        By this Application, the Applicant seeks her enlargement

on bail in connection with C.R. No. 922 of 2025 dated 27 th

August 2025 registered with the Thane Railway Police Station,

District: Mumbai Railway for the offences punishable under

Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(C), 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and

Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) and

Section 3(5)of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’).




                                   Page 1 of 7
                              th
                            17 February 2026
Shivgan                                          8-BA-643-2026.doc



2.        The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, while the

Police Officials were patrolling in the reserved coaches of

Train No. 18030, which reached the Thane Railway Station,

the demeanor of the Accused was found to be suspicious.

Hence, they were intercepted. After following due process of

law, four bags, which they were carrying were searched. Upon

search, two bags in possession of the Applicant led to the

recovery of 11.096 kilograms and 6.233 kilograms of Ganja

respectively aggregating to 17.329 kilograms of Ganja. Two

bags of other Accused namely, Amina Khan led to the recovery

of 7.464 kilograms and 8.13 kilograms of Ganja respectively

totaling to 15.594 kilograms of Ganja. Thus, the contraband

was seized and the Applicant was arrested on 27 th August

2025.



3.        The Applicant filed an application seeking bail before

the Special Judge (NDPS), Thane. However, by order dated 9 th

December 2025, her bail application came to be rejected.




                                   Page 2 of 7
                              th
                            17 February 2026
Shivgan                                         8-BA-643-2026.doc



Hence, the Applicant is before this Court for the reliefs as

prayed.



4.        Ms. Zehra Charania, learned counsel appearing for the

Applicant, submits that the Ganja recovered from the present

Applicant is of intermediate quantity. She further submits that

the Applicant is in custody since August 2025 and till date,

charges are not framed. She also submits that the substance

alleged to have been recovered from the Applicant does not

fall within the definition of ‘Ganja’ under the provisions of the

NDPS Act. The FIR and the Seizure Panchanama also do not

reflect any description of the purported contraband as

consisting of flowering or fruiting tops, segregated from

leaves, seeds and stalks. Thus, in absence of any such

description in the Panchanama or the FIR, there is nothing to

establish that the substance seized by the officials was in fact

Ganja. Ms. Charania also places reliance on the order of the

Supreme Court dated 13th December 2023 passed in Special




                                  Page 3 of 7
                             th
                           17 February 2026
Shivgan                                         8-BA-643-2026.doc



Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.10734 of 2023. She thus, submits

that the Applicant be released on bail.



5.        Ms. Anuja Gotad, learned APP representing the State in

the matter, submits that there is ample material on record in

the form of CDRs and bank transactions to show that the

Applicant was involved in drug peddling. However, she

concedes that there are no antecedents against the present

Applicant. She thus, resists the Bail Application.



6.        Heard learned counsel appearing for the respective

parties and perused the record with their assistance.



7.        Admittedly, the quantity of Ganja recovered from the

Applicant is aggregating to 17.329 kilograms, which is below

the commercial quantity. The Applicant does not have any

antecedents against her. Additionally, the Applicant is

incarcerated since August 2025 without charges being framed

as on date. I have also gone through the order passed by the

Supreme Court relied upon by Ms. Charania. The Supreme



                                  Page 4 of 7
                             th
                           17 February 2026
Shivgan                                        8-BA-643-2026.doc



Court has observed that even though there were two accused

found in possession of Ganja, the quantity held by each

Accused has to be considered separately.


8.           In view of the aforesaid discussion, 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 on first Monday

      between 11:00 a.m. to 02:00 p.m. till the charges are

      framed;




                                 Page 5 of 7
                            th
                          17 February 2026
Shivgan                                        8-BA-643-2026.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
                          17 February 2026
 Shivgan                                               8-BA-643-2026.doc



       ix)         Any infraction of the aforesaid conditions

       shall entail cancellation of bail.



 9.        The Bail 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)

          Digitally
          signed by
          SHAMBHAVI
SHAMBHAVI NILESH
NILESH    SHIVGAN
SHIVGAN   Date:
          2026.02.18
          11:17:04
          +0530




                                     Page 7 of 7
                                th
                              17 February 2026


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.