1 28. BA 1156 of 2026.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO.1156 OF 2026 NISAR NIYAJI MUKHTYAR NIYAJI VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR PSO. PS BARSHITAKLI, DIST. AKOLA Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr. S.M. Syed a/w Mr. Vipul Bajpayee & Mr. Taraq Sayyed, Advocate for Applicant. Ms. S.N. Thakur, APP for Non-Applicant-State. CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J. DATED : 14th OCTOBER 2026 PER COURT :- 1. Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State. 2. By this application, the applicant is seeking bail in connection with Crime No.532 of 2024, registered with Police Station Barshi Takli, Dist. Akola, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(C), 22(C), 25, 29 of the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, “NDPS Act”), Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 341(2), 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNS”) and Section 135 of the Indian Electricity Act. 3. The crime was registered on the basis of a report lodged by Police Inspector Shankar Shelke, L.C.B., Akola, on 24.10.2024. It is 2026:BHC-NAG:13894 2 28. BA 1156 of 2026.odt alleged that while he was on patrolling duty within the jurisdiction of Barshitakli Police Station, at about 6.00 p.m., he received secret information that the psychotropic substance Mephedrine (MD) was being manufactured for sale on the premises of a defunct ginning mill belonging to Mohammad Shafi, situated at Barshitakli. Upon receiving the information, the informant immediately intimated his superiors. After following due procedure, the police conducted the raid and seized Ephedrine powder contained in 22 plastic packets total 5548 grams worth Rs.1,38,70,000/-. In addition, the police seized 133 kgs. Soda ash, 410 Ltrs. Acetone, 60 Ltrs, Chloroform, 40 Ltrs. Methamphetamine (M.M.), 140 Ltrs. Prepolphinol (PP) and various other articles. 4. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the controlled substance i.e. Ephedrine weighing 5548 grams was found. He submits that since it is a controlled substance, the rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act would not be applicable and for that purpose, he relies on the judgment of the High Court of Delhi in the case of Niranjan Jayantilal Shah Vs. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Decided on 19.11.2013, in Bail Application No.1202 of 2013, and also relies on the orders passed by this Court in the batch of application in the case of Kishor Shinh Bhavsinh Rathod Vs. The State of Maharashtra, decided on 06.12.2022, in Bail Application No.323 of 3 28. BA 1156 of 2026.odt 2020, with other bail applications, wherein this Court, while considering the rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act, has specifically observed that, as far as the controlled substance is concerned, there is no specification of the quantity being small/commercial, and it is a stand-alone provision as the substance is neither Narcotic Drug nor psychotropic substance and any person indulging in the same in contravention to the licence, that has been conferred would be liable for punishment under Section 25A of the NDPS Act. He invites my attention to Schedule A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Regulation of Controlled Substances) Order, 2013. He submits that the provisions incorporated in the said schedule needs to be complied with and then, only this controlled substance can be used, otherwise it will amount to offence under Section 9A of the NDPS Act. He also invites my attention to the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has granted bail to accused Jatin on 17.06.2026. Therefore, he submits that the applicant deserves to be granted bail. 5. On the other hand, learned APP vehemently opposes the application and submits that the controlled substance is found in a defunct ginning mill. She submits that the intent of the applicant could be gathered since he along with other co-accused was intending to manufacture Ephedrine Drug using chemicals which were found on 4 28. BA 1156 of 2026.odt the spot of incident along with Ephedrine Drug. She submits that, as per the control order, the procedure has laid down for the use of said Ephedrine. This substance cannot be used in normal course and under such circumstances, since the applicant is responsible for arranging logistic for transporting the said Ephedrine Drug and since he was indulged in managing accommodation to the other co-accused persons, the applicant does not deserve to be granted bail. 6. Upon consideration of the submissions of both the sides and after going through the judgments of this Court and Delhi High Court (cited supra) and upon perusal of the entire relevant papers of the investigation, it appears that the allegations against the applicant are that the applicant was indulged in providing logistical support and arranging an accommodation for the manufacture of Ephedrine. It further appears from the investigation papers that although the applicant is alleged to be one of the links in the chain of the accused persons, however, it is to be noted that the rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act would not be applicable considering the judgments delivered by the Delhi High Court and by this Court. The reasons recorded in those judgments would be applicable in the present case. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act would not be applicable to the controlled substance. 5 28. BA 1156 of 2026.odt 7. So far as the other aspects are concerned, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has already granted bail to accused Jatin Doshi, in the month of June 2026. Apparently, the applicant was arrested on 24.10.2024. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Hence, the following order. ORDER i) The Criminal Application is allowed and disposed of. ii) The applicant/accused viz. Nisar Niyaji Mukhtyar Niyaji, be released on bail in connection with Crime No.532 of 2024, registered with Police Station Barshi Takli, Dist. Akola, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(C), 22(C), 25, 29 of the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 341(2), 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 135 of the Indian Electricity Act, on furnishing a P.R. Bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with two sureties in the like amount. iii) The accused shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, as also shall not tamper with the evidence. iv) The accused shall provide his residential address and cell number to concerned Police Station and shall not change 6 28. BA 1156 of 2026.odt his place of residence without prior intimation to the concerned Investigating Officer. v) The applicant/accused shall attend each and every date of trial regularly. If he fails to attend the trial on even a single date or fails to comply with the aforesaid conditions, his default would entail the State to ask for cancellation of bail. vi) Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. 8. The observations of this Court are prima facie in nature and are only limited to this application. The trial Court shall not be influenced by the aforesaid observations. (M.M. NERLIKAR, J.) asd