P.H. JAYANI 07 BA2356.2026.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2356 OF 2026 Suman Narottam Sharma …. Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra …Respondent Mr. Ayaz Khan a/w. Mr. Dilip Mishra, Ms. Mallika Sharma i/b. Ms. Zehra Charania for the Applicant. Mr. Vinod Chate, APP for the Respondent – State. Mr. Kishor Kharat, PSI, Dharavi Police Station, present. CORAM: SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J. DATED : 30th SEPTEMBER, 2026 P.C. :- 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Perused the record. 2. The applicant seeks her release on bail in Special Case (NDPS) No. 2202 of 2025 pending the City Civil and Sessions Court, Gr. Mumbai, arising out of Cr.No.360/2025 registered with Dharavi Police Station, Mumbai for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) read with 21, 22 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“NDPS Act”) on the Report dated 02.05.2025 lodged by Mr. Bhaskar Chavan, PHC. 3. The prosecution case is that on 02.05.2025, at about 15:25 hours, within Dharavi Police Station area, while Mr. Jatkar, PC and other police with him including Mr. Koli, PSI were present on duty, said Mr. Jatkar received a secret information from his source that the applicant and the co-accused Bharat Sharma were selling contraband substance ‘MD’ from their residence at Shatabdinagar, Dharavi. Mr. Jatkar conveyed that information to Mr. Koli, PSI. In P.H. JAYANI 07 BA2356.2026.DOC turn, Mr. Koli reduced that information into writing and forwarded it to his superiors Mr. Pawar, PI and Sr.P.I. and also to Assistant Police Commissioner Office, Kurla. The said APC directed to take an appropriate action and included Mr. Pawar, PI in that team. It is alleged that, at about 16:55 to 17:05 hours, the police carried out the raid at the residence of the applicant in the presence of panchas. The applicant was present there. After initial legal formalities and serving upon the applicant necessary notice u/S. 50 of NDPS Act, Mr. Pawar and Mr. Koli inspected the rooms in the house of the applicant. They found one plastic box in the inner room which was containing 6 plastic packets each containing 100 grams of MD. In the outer room they found two transparent plastic packets of same contraband weighing 32 grams and 24 grams respectively. Said substance was seized and a panchanama was recorded. Accordingly, present crime was registered and the applicant came to be arrested. On completion of the investigation, police submitted the charge-sheet showing the co-accused as wanted. 4. Record indicates that, initially, the applicant had applied for bail during pendency of the investigation and on its rejection, filed BA/2935/2025 before this Court. On that occasion, after hearing the submissions and upon a prima facie consideration of the material on record, this Court was not inclined to grant the relief as prayed. Therefore, the then learned Advocate appearing for the applicant, sought permission to withdraw that application and on the grant of such permission, the application was withdrawn. 5. Mr. Khan, the learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that on receipt of the charge-sheet, it appeared that, this is a case of non-compliance of Section 42 of NDPS Act, which fact, the P.H. JAYANI 07 BA2356.2026.DOC applicant was not aware on the earlier occasions when she had sought for bail before the trial Court as well as before this Court. Therefore, non-compliance of Section 42 is a new ground and, it entitles the applicant to be released on bail. 6. Mr. Chate, the learned APP on the other hand submitted that, there is a proper compliance of Section 42 of the NDPS Act. Whatever discrepancies in that regard have been pointed out on behalf of the applicant, same are the aspects to be dealt with at the time of trial. The applicant was found in possession of commercial quantity of the contraband ‘MD’, which she failed to explain. As such, the rigours of Section 37 of NDPS Act are applicable in this case, which disqualifies the applicant for bail. 7. I have considered these submissions. Admittedly, the secret information was received by Mr. Jatkar. However, Mr. Jatkar did not record that information into writing. Therefore, question of compliance of Section 42 (2) of NDPS Act does not arise here. Although, Mr. Koli, PSI had reduced the alleged secret information into writing, he had not received that information. Therefore, compliance of Section 42 of NDPS Act by Mr. Koli is no compliance in law. 8. The object of Section 42 NDPS Act is to provide a legal framework for the entry, search, seizure and arrest of an individual without a warrant or authorisation in cases of narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and controlled substances. This provision is designated to prevent the destruction of evidence and enable swift action in drugs related offences. The Section aims to balance the need for enforcement with the protection of the civil liberties by imposing mandatory procedural safeguards. In the P.H. JAYANI 07 BA2356.2026.DOC case in hand, prima facie it appears that the said balance is completely ignored. 9. In the wake of the above, prima facie there is a reason to suspect that the applicant was found in possession of the alleged commercial quantity of the contraband ‘MD’. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Therefore, it is not likely that the applicant would commit identical offences, if released on bail. Thus, the two condition of Section 37 of NDPS Act, 1985 can be said to have been met. As a result, the applicant is entitled for bail. Hence, order :- (i) The applicant - Suman Narottam Sharma be released on bail in Special Case (NDPS) No.2202 of 2025 pending on the file of learned Special Judge, (NDPS) and Additional Sessions Judge, Gr. Mumbai arising out of Cr.No.360/2025 registered with Dharavi Police Station, Mumbai, on her executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount. (ii) The applicant shall mark her attendance at Dharavi Police Station, Mumbai on 1st day of a month, in every two months, 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 indulge in identical activities for which she has been arraigned in this case. (v) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall not directly or indirectly influence the P.H. JAYANI 07 BA2356.2026.DOC prosecution witnesses to prevent them from deposing against her. (vi) 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. (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. 10. Bail Application stands disposed of in aforesaid terms. (SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.) PREETI HEERO JAYANI Digitally signed by PREETI HEERO JAYANI Date: 2026.10.03 13:32:19 +0530