AKASH PARSHOTTAMBHAI PATELversusDIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE (DRI), AHMEDABAD ZONAL UNIT

      R/CR.MA/1314/2026                            ORDER DATED: 12/08/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

 R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL -
             AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 1314 of 2026

==========================================================
                 AKASH PARSHOTTAMBHAI PATEL
                             Versus
      DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE (DRI), AHMEDABAD
                       ZONAL UNIT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. I.H.SYED, SENIOR ADVOCATE with MR KEVAL G BRAHMBHATT
(BAROT)(9900) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR UTKARSH R SHARMA(6157) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR. J.K.SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY

                             Date : 12/08/2026

                                 ORDER


1.      The Applicant has filed this Application under Section 439 of the
Indian Penal Code for enlarging the Applicant on Regular Bail in
connection with FIR being F.No. D/RI/AZU/GI-02/ENQ-01/NDPS/2024
in Special NDPS Case No. 46 of 2024 pending before the Court of
Special Court (under NDPS Act), at Ahmedabad for the offence under
Sections 22, 23, 24, 25, 27-A, 28 & 29 read with Section 8(c) of NDPS
Act, 1985.

2.      Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. I.H.Syed appearing with
learned Advocate Mr. Keval G. Brahmbhatt for the Applicant, learned
APP Mr. J.K.shah appearing for the Respondent – State and learned
Advocate Mr. Utkarsh R. Sharma appearing on behalf of Respondent
No.2 – Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, DRI, Zonal Unit,
Ahmedabad.


3.      Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Applicant submitted

                                 Page 1 of 4
     R/CR.MA/1314/2026                                ORDER DATED: 12/08/2026




that the Applicant has been arrested in connection with the present
offence on 18.01.2024 and since then the Applicant is in the custody. The
investigation was concluded and the complaint was lodged by the
department on 11.7.2024.            Though the Applicant has undergone
incarceration for a period of more than two years and six months, till date
even the charge is not framed against the Applicant by the learned trial
court. He further submitted that as per the law laid down by the Apex
Court in case of Syed Iftikhar Andrabi v. National Investigation Agency,
Jammu – 2026 SCC Online SC 881, when the offence alleged against the
accused is serious in nature, it is the duty of the prosecution to conclude
the trial expeditiously and it is the right of the accused that he be tried
expeditiously for the offence. He therefore submitted to allow the present
Application and enlarge the Applicant on bail subject to suitable
conditions.

5.     Learned Advocate Mr. Utkarsh Sharma appearing for Respondent
No.1 – Union of India - The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, DRI,
Zonal Unit, Ahmedabad, has opposed the present Application contending
that the present Applicant was a share holder of the company holding
20% of shares.           The Applicant is actively involved in hatching the
conspiracy for commission of the offence in question. The investigating
agency has collected sufficient material against the Applicant to connect
him with the present offence. So far as delay in trial is concerned, he
submitted that the prosecution is not responsible for the delay caused in
the trial. He therefore submitted to dismiss the present Application.


6.     Learned APP for the Respondent – State has also opposed the
present application for grant of regular bail and submitted that looking to
the nature of offence, this Court may not exercise the discretion in favour
of the applicant and the Application may be dismissed.


                                     Page 2 of 4
     R/CR.MA/1314/2026                              ORDER DATED: 12/08/2026




7.     Heard learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties. It is
the case of the prosecution against the accused in the present case is that
the company with which they were associated was having a license to
manufacture Hydroxylimine Hydrochloride which is considered to be a
precursor for manufacture of Ketamine. It is a contraband substance. It
is further the case of prosecution that under the guise of manufcturing
Hydroxylimine Hydrochloride, the company i.e. Megashri Agri Pharma
Chemical Private Limited was manufacturing Ketamine and the said
substance i.e. Ketamine was being exported to Thailand by the company.
On the basis of secret information gathered by the Respondents, a
shipment as intercepted by the Respondent Authorities. The shipment in
question was dispatched by M/s Megashri Agri Pharma Chemical Private
Limited to Bangkok Thailand. Upon local examination by the concerned
authorities, the shipment was found containing contraband substance of
Ketamine.


8.     From the record, it appears that the Applicant had invested the
amount of Rs.25 Lakhs in the company namely M/s Megashri Agri
Pharma Chemical Private Limited and was holding 20% shares of the
company. The Applicant used to regularly visit the factory premises of
the company. The material available on record also indicates that the
Applicant herein was found present at the factory premises when the
shipment in question was packed. The present Applicant along with the
other co-accused had received the material as regards process for
manufacturing of the contraband.          The Applicant herein had also
remained present in several meetings which had taken place between the
accused persons for discussing the modus operandi to be adopted for
exporting the consignment of Ketamine to Malaysia and Thailand. The
Applicant herein had also received a sizeable amount in his bank account


                                 Page 3 of 4
                 R/CR.MA/1314/2026                                                             ORDER DATED: 12/08/2026




          through cash for the period commencing from 3.04.2021 to 30.11.2023


          9.         From the bare perusal of the papers of investigation, it appears that
          the petitioner along with the other co-accused was running a racket for
          manufacturing and export of the contraband substance under the guise of
          the product which the company was licensed to manufacture.                                                          The
          quantity of the contraband substance involved in the case is a commercial
          quantity and therefore the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would
          come into play.


          10.        In view of the aforesaid discussion, no case for exercising
          discretion in favour of the Applicant is made out. Hence, the Application
          is dismissed.

                                                                                                    (M. R. MENGDEY,J)

          J.N.W / SB I/5




Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: JAYANTILAL NARAYAN WAGHELA(HC00178), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 12/08/2026 15:44:17




                                                                 Page 4 of 4