PRASAD 20_BA_1628_2025.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1628 OF 2025 Firdos Rashid Shaikh Alias Laccho ...Applicant V/s. State Of Mahrahstra …Respondent Mr. Kamlesh Mahadev Satre, for the Applicant. Mr. Prasanna Malshe, APP for the Respondent – State. Mr. Sushil Londhe, API a/w Mr. Nitin Palande, API, Trombay Police Station, present. CORAM: SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J. DATED : 7TH JULY 2026 P.C. :- . The Applicant seeks her release on bail in connection with C.R. No.421 of 2024, registered with Trombay Police Station, District Mumbai, for offence punishable under Sections 8(c) and 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short “NDPS Act”). 2. Heard Mr. Satre, learned counsel for the Applicant and Mr.Malshe, learned APP for Respondent – State. 3. The prosecution case is that on 28.08.2024, at about 22:30 hours at Chita Camp, near Maharashtra Nagar Road, Mankhurd Mumbai – 10, the Applicant was found in possession of 13 bottles of chlorpheniramine maleate and codeine phosphate syrup. The said bottles were seized in the presence of Panchas recording a Panchanama. Mr. Ramchandra Akhade, PHC filed the Report based on which said crime came to be registered. The Applicant was arrested on 29.08.2024. Investigation culminated into filing PRASAD RAJENDRASING RAJPUT Digitally signed by PRASAD RAJENDRASING RAJPUT Date: 2026.07.09 19:45:19 +0530 PRASAD 20_BA_1628_2025.DOC of charge-sheet. The Applicant’s prayer for bail came to be declined by the Trial Court. 4. Mr. Satre, learned counsel for the Applicant, submitted that the Applicant is seeking bail on the ground that personal search of the Applicant is vitiated because it was conducted in presence of male Gazetted Officer. In Miss. Heena Bharat Shah v. State of Maharashtra (B.A. No. 1051 of 2016, decided on 24.04.2017), this Court referred to the Division Bench judgment in Mrs. Veenela Tilak v. Shri Shahasane, Assistant Collector of Customs & Anr. 1997 All MR (Cri) 368 and held that, such a personal search of a woman is in contravention of Section 50 (4) of the NDPS Act and it is violative of the said provision. Secondly, he submitted that the Applicant is behind bars for almost two years. Although the charges are framed, no witness has been examined till date. 5. Mr. Malshe, the learned APP for the Respondent – State, submitted that the Applicant is found in possession of commercial quantity of contraband. The Applicant has not shown that she is not guilty of the offence. The Applicant has two criminal antecedents. Therefore, he submits that Application be rejected. 6. I have considered these submissions. It is fact that, the Applicant was searched in the presence of male Gazetted Officers. Secondly, the Applicant is behind bars for almost two years. Mr. Malshe stated that the prosecution is going to examine ten witnesses, which will take at least a year. The Applicant is a woman. The contraband is marginally above the commercial quantity. However, the value of the contraband seized is Rs.7,800/-. It cannot be denied that the Applicant’s incarceration must be causing great hardships to her family. Out of the two crimes previously registered against the Applicant, one is for small PRASAD 20_BA_1628_2025.DOC quantity and another for intermediate quantity. In both crimes, she is enlarged on bail. Considering these aspects, the Applicant is entitled for bail. Hence, following Order :- (i) Applicant – Firdos Rashid Shaikh Alias Laccho be released on bail in C.R. No.421 of 2024, registered with Trombay Police Station, District Mumbai, for offence punishable under Sections 8(c) and 22(c) of the NDPS Act, on her executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount. (ii) The Applicant shall mark her attendance at Trombay Police Station, Mumbai on 1st day of each calender month between 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. till conclusion of the trial. (iii) The Applicant shall regularly attend the proceedings before the jurisdictional Court unless exempted by the said Court, for the reasons to be recorded in writing. (iv) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall not directly or indirectly influence upon the prosecution witnesses to prevent them from deposing against him. (v) On being released from jail, the Applicant shall furnish her contact number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep him updated, in case there is any change. (vi) The Applicant shall not indulge in identical activities for which she has been arraigned in this case. PRASAD 20_BA_1628_2025.DOC (vii) By way of abundant caution, it is clarified that the observations made hereinabove are confined for the purpose of determination to the entitlement for bail and they may not be construed as an expression of opinion on the guilt or otherwise of the Applicant and the trial Court shall not be influenced by any of the observations made hereinabove. 7. Bail Application stands disposed of in aforesaid terms. 8. At this stage, as requested by Mr. Satre, the Applicant is granted two weeks time to furnish surety. Till then, the Applicant be released on bail on her executing a P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- and depositing a sum of Rs.50,000/- in lieu of furnishing the surety bond. 9. At the end of the said period of two weeks, the Applicant shall furnish surety. On furnishing such surety/ies, the amount of Rs.50,000/- deposited by the Applicant shall be returned. (SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.)