Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10016 (BOM)

HANIF ABDUL GAFUR KHAN v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

BA/2592/2026 · 2026-09-21

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

MANOJ 46-BA-2592-2026.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.2592 OF 2026 Hanif Abdul Gafur Khan …Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra …Respondent Ms. Afreen Shaikh a/w Ms. Nikhat Shaikh, for the Applicant. Mr. H.J. Dedhia, APP for the Respondent-State. Mr. Madhukar L. Moule, Shivaji Nagar Police Station, Mumbai, present. CORAM: SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J. DATED : 21st SEPTEMBER, 2026 P.C. :- 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the record. 2. Applicant seeks his release on bail in connection with Cr.No.600 of 2025, registered with Shivaji Nagar Police Station, Mumbai for the offence punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b), 22(b) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“NDPS Act”), on the Report dated 8th August, 2025 filed by Mr. Dada Virkar, Police Constable. 3. As alleged, on 08.08.2025, at 00.15 hours, at Govandi, the applicant and 6 others were found transporting and possessing different types of illicit narcotic substances. The applicant was found in possession of 11 bottles, each containing 100 ml codeine phosphate based cough syrup. Therefore, the applicant and his co- accused were arrested. On completion of the investigation, charge- sheet was filed. The bail application filed by the applicant was rejected by the trial Court. Page 1 of 4 WAKLE MANOJ JANARDHAN Digitally signed by WAKLE MANOJ JANARDHAN Date: 2026.09.22 19:31:13 +0530 MANOJ 46-BA-2592-2026.DOC 4. Ms.Shaikh, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that, there is no material to show that the applicant was present at the spot, at the time of the alleged chance recovery. The applicant is in jail for last more than one year. Till the date, charge is not framed. She submitted that, the applicant has one criminal antecedent under Section 307 of the IPC, in which he is on bail. Therefore, the applicant may be released on bail. 5. Mr. Dedhia, learned APP, submitted that, the applicant was found in possession of commercial quantity of the contraband, which he has not explained. Therefore, bail be refused. 6. I have considered these submissions. Considering the material on record, there is a prima facie case against the applicant of having possessed 11 bottles of the contraband substance. However, it cannot be ignored that the applicant is behind bars for last 13 months. Till the date, charge is not framed. Ms. Shaikh, submitted that, recently, the Presiding Officer of the trial Court is transferred and the said Court is vacant. As such, the trial is not likely to commence and conclude within a foreseeable future. In the previous offence, the applicant is on bail which he has not misused. 7. In the case of MD Ezaz Afzal & Anr. v. State of W.B SLA (Crl.) 12419/2024, the petitioners were arrested on 10.12.2023 as 1920 bottles of codeine phosphate syrup were seized from them. The trial was not commenced. No witness was examined, though 14 were cited by the prosecution. Taking note of the quantity of codeine phosphate syrup allegedly involved in the case and, the period of incarceration (11 months) already undergone by the Petitioners, the Hon’ble Supreme Court released them on bail. In the case of Anandbhai Rajendrabhai Vaniya v. State of Gujarat, Criminal Appeal No.859/2025 arising out of [SLP MANOJ 46-BA-2592-2026.DOC (Crl.) No.17042/2024], as alleged, the appellant was driving the car from which 995 bottles of RX Codeine Phosphate & Triprolidine Hydrochloride syrup were seized. The appellant had figured in eight cases, but, was discharged in five cases, acquitted in two cases and in the other remaining case, he was on bail. Taking into consideration the 17 months incarceration of the Applicant, the nature of allegations levelled against him and, the possibility of the trial not being concluded anytime soon, the Hon’ble Supreme Court released the appellant on bail. 8. Therefore, and considering the facts and circumstances of the case as a whole, the applicant may be released on bail. Hence, following Order:- (i) Applicant – Hanif Abdul Gafur Khan shall be released on bail in connection with Cr.No.600 of 2025, registered with Shivaji Nagar Police Station, Mumbai, on his furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount. (ii) The applicant shall mark his attendance at Shivaji Nagar Police Station, Mumbai, on the 1st day of each calendar month between 12:00 noon to 4:00 p.m., till the 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 witness to prevent them from deposing against him. MANOJ 46-BA-2592-2026.DOC (v) On being released from jail, the applicant shall furnish his contact number and residential address to the Investigation Officer and shall keep him updated, in case there is any change. (vi) The applicant shall not indulge in identical activities for which he has been arraigned in this case. (vii) It is clarified that any observation made in the present Order are for the purpose of deciding the present Bail application and should not influence the outcome of the trial and also not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 9. Application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.)