$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010831162025 + BAIL APPLN. 4097/2025 ABDUL SESAY .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Anup Kumar Das and Mr. Uday Chauhan, Advs. versus DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE .....Respondent Through: Mr. Satish Aggarwala, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN O R D E R % 05.08.2026 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2. The present petition has been filed under Section 483 read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNSS’) read with Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’) seeking grant of regular bail in Session Case No. 521/2023 arising out of Complaint Case No. DRI/338/XVIII/2023, registered by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) for the offences punishable under Sections 8, 21, 23 and 29 of the NDPS Act. 3. Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that pursuant to specific intelligence received by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), the petitioner, a national of Sierra Leone, was intercepted on his arrival at Terminal-3, Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi on 24.06.2023 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/08/2026 at 11:21:47 from Conakry, Guinea via Addis Ababa, on suspicion of carrying narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances. It is stated that no contraband was recovered during the search of the petitioner or his baggage. However, in view of the specific intelligence and the petitioner's alleged suspicious conduct, he was produced before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Patiala House Courts, and, pursuant to the orders of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, was admitted to Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital for medical examination. It is the case of the prosecution that during the course of his hospitalization, the petitioner expelled 89 capsules from his body, and upon testing the contents of one of the capsules with the Field Drug Detection Kit, the same tested positive for cocaine. It is further alleged that the recovered capsules were seized in accordance with law and that the prosecution also relies upon a statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act. Thereafter, the petitioner was arrested on 27.06.2023 and, upon completion of investigation, a complaint was filed before the learned Trial Court. Charges were framed vide order dated 22.12.2023. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents and has remained in judicial custody for the last about three years. He further submits that, as per the report received from the learned Trial Court, the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. It is, therefore, prayed that the petitioner be released on regular bail. 5. Learned counsel for the DRI/respondent submits that 89 capsules having 1809 grams of cocaine were recovered from the body of the petitioner and that charges have already been framed in the present case. He further submits that, in view of the embargo under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the petitioner is not entitled to the grant of bail. It is, therefore, prayed that the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/08/2026 at 11:21:47 present application be dismissed. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has placed reliance upon the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mannalal v. State of Rajasthan, SLP (Cr.) No. 10560/2026 and Md. Monazir Hassan v. Union of India & Anr., SLP (Cr.) No. 8624/2026, wherein it has been held that in cases of prolonged incarceration, the embargo under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985 would not apply. He further submits that there is a violation of Sections 42 and 52 of the NDPS Act and that the petitioner's passport has already been impounded by the DRI. 7. He further submits that the grounds of arrest were not supplied to the petitioner and, therefore, the arrest is illegal. In support of the said contention, he has placed reliance upon Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra & Anr., 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2356, Dr. Rajinder Rajan v. Union of India & Anr., 2026 SCC OnLine SC 802 and Ahmed Mansoor & Ors. v. State, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2650. 8. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the plea regarding non- supply of the grounds of arrest has not been taken in the present bail application, which is controverted by learned counsel for the petitioner, who is present in Court. 9. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the petitioner was arrested on 24.06.2023 and, at the relevant time, there was no such requirement under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Cr.P.C.') regarding communication of the grounds of arrest. 10. Heard the counsels for the parties and perused the record. 11. The report received from the learned Trial Court states that approximately 50–60 effective dates would be required for conclusion of the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/08/2026 at 11:21:47 trial. The petitioner has also remained in judicial custody for about three years. 12. The allegations against the petitioner are that 89 capsules containing 1,809 grams of cocaine were recovered from his body. The quantity allegedly recovered is commercial in nature and, therefore, the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are attracted. The petitioner is also a foreign national and, therefore, the possibility of his being a flight risk cannot be ruled out. 13. Insofar as the judgments relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground of prolonged incarceration are concerned, the same would not come to the aid of the petitioner in the facts and circumstances of the present case, having regard to the nature of the allegations, the commercial quantity of contraband allegedly recovered and the embargo contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. 14. Seeing the nature of the allegations and the gravity of the offence no ground for bail is made out. 15. Considering the nature of the allegations, the gravity of the offence, the quantity of contraband allegedly recovered and the embargo contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. 16. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. 17. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. MADHU JAIN, J AUGUST 5, 2026/prg/Av This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/08/2026 at 11:21:47