Bombay High Court
Amarjeet Shamsher SinghversusThe State of Maharashtra
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
In the absence of any material connecting the applicant to the alleged offence, the trial would amount to abuse of process and the applicant must be discharged.
Summary
Amarjeet Shamsher Singh filed a criminal revision challenging the Special Judge's order rejecting his discharge application. The prosecution alleged that Singh supplied 1,430 bottles of Codeine Phosphate Syrup seized from co-accused on 10-11-2018, relying solely on the co-accused's statement. Singh contended he was falsely implicated and that no material besides the co-accused's statement linked him to the crime. The High Court, after hearing counsel, found no documentary evidence, call records, or other material connecting Singh to the contraband, deeming continuation of the trial an abuse of process. Consequently, the revision was allowed, and Singh was discharged from the pending case.
Issues considered
- Whether the statement of a co-accused alone is sufficient to sustain prosecution against the applicant.
- Whether the absence of any material evidence connecting the applicant to the contraband warrants discharge.
- Whether continuation of the trial in such circumstances amounts to abuse of process of law.
Subjects
- criminal revision
- discharge
- insufficient evidence
- abuse of process
- statement of co-accused
- codeine syrup contraband
Judgment
7-REVN-533-2025 (CR).doc
S.S.Kilaje
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 533 OF 2025
Amarjeet Shamsher Singh … Applicant
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra … Respondent
_________________________________________________________________
Digitally signed
SONALI SATISH
by SONALI
SATISH Date:
KILAJE Mr. Kamlesh Mishra a/w Mr. Dilip Kamath and Mr. Sagar Kamath,
KILAJE 2026.08.31
15:04:35 +0530
Advocate for Applicant.
Mr. S.S.Pednekar, APP for Respondent-State.
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 27th AUGUST, 2026.
P.C. :
1. The challenge in this application is to the order date 29.10.2025
below Exhibit-11 passed by the learned Special Judge (N.D.P.S.),
Brihanmumbai, whereby discharge application preferred by the applicant
came to be rejected.
2. It is prosecution’s case that on 10.11.2018, the police
apprehended the co-accused and from their possession seized 1430 bottles
of Codeine Phosphate Syrup with the label of the company M-Crox. It is
alleged that the said bottles were supplied to the co-accused by the
applicant.
3. It is contention of the applicant that the applicant has been
Page 1 of 3
7-REVN-533-2025 (CR).doc
S.S.Kilaje
falsely implicated in this case on the basis of the statement of co-accused.
Except the statement of co-accused, nothing has been produced on record
to show the involvement of the applicant in the crime. However, this fact
is not considered by the learned Special Judge and has erroneously passed
the order and requested to allow the application. He relied on the
Judgment of this Court i.e. Savitri Periyaswami Devendra Vs. The State of
Maharashtra (Criminal Revision Application No. 498 of 2016)1.
4. It is contention of learned APP that co-accused were
apprehended by the police with the contraband and the said contraband
was supplied to them by the applicant. There are specific allegations
against the applicant. The learned Special Judge has passed well reasoned
order and no interference is required in it and requested to reject the
application.
5. I have heard both the learned counsel. Perused impugned order
and documents produced on record. It is alleged that the seized
contraband were supplied to the co-accused by the applicant. Except the
statement of co-accused, no material is produced on record to connect the
applicant with the crime. Moreover, no CDR is produced on record to
show that the applicant was in contact with the co-accused. In absence of
any material connecting applicant with the alleged offence, continuation of
trial against him would amount to abuse of process of law. As there is no
1 2018 BHC-AS : 5609
Page 2 of 3
7-REVN-533-2025 (CR).doc
S.S.Kilaje
material at all against the applicant to proceed against him, I pass
following order.
ORDER
(i) The Revision Application is allowed and disposed of.
(ii) The applicant is discharged in Special Case (N.D.P.S.) No.
130 of 2019 pending before the A.N.C. Ghatkopar Unit,
Mumbai.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
Page 3 of 3
Checking your session…