Bail Appln. No.651/2026 :: 1 :: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO.651 OF 2026 Vishal s/o Ashok Gaikwad … APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra … RESPONDENT ....... Mr. K.N. Shermale, Advocate for applicant Mr. S.V. Hange, A.P.P. for respondent – State ....… WITH BAIL APPLICATION NO.564 OF 2026 Shubham s/o Chandrakant Jadhav … APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra … RESPONDENT ....... Mr. K.N. Shermale, Advocate for applicant Mr. S.V. Hange, A.P.P. for respondent – State ....… WITH BAIL APPLICATION NO.826 OF 2026 Pratamesh Ashok Pawde … APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra … RESPONDENT ....... Mr. Y.S. Choudhari, Advocate for applicant Mr. S.V. Hange, A.P.P. for respondent – State ....… 2026:BHC-AUG:23610 Bail Appln. No.651/2026 :: 2 :: CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : 12th JUNE, 2026 PER COURT : 1. By these applications, the applicants are seeking their release on regular bail in connection with Crime No.1073/2025, registered at Sangamner Police Station, District Ahilyanagar for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b), 22(b), 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. 2. The prosecution case in short is that, on the basis of secret information, a raid was conducted in the shop block of Vishal Rahane in which the accused Shubham Chandrakant Jadhav, Vishal Ashok gaikwad, pratamesh Ashok Pawde and Parvez Daud Shaikh were found . It is alleged that, on search, 32 Kgs. 485 gms. Narcotic drugs like Ganja was found A sample of 100 gms. each of dry Ganja was taken for chamical analysis and the accused were arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the respective applicants submit that, the quantification of the alleged contraband is de hors of the statutory provisions of the Act, which entitles the applicants to be Bail Appln. No.651/2026 :: 3 :: admitted to bail. It is further submitted that, there are no criminal antecedents against the applicants. The applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. One of the accused is already admitted to bail by the Special Court. The learned counsel therefore prayed to allow the applications. 4. Per contra, learned A.P.P. vehemently opposed the applications, submitting that the complicity of the applicants in the offence is evident from the material collected by the investigating officer. Substantial quantity of the contraband excluding commercial quantity is seized. Procedure is applied by the investigating officer, which disentitles the applicants to be admitted to bail. He therefore prayed to reject the application. 5. Upon considering the submissions of both sides and perusal of material on record, including the charge sheet, the commercial quantity in relation to the N.D.P.S. Act is considered to be 20 Kgs. or above. However, the expression ‘Ganja’ specifically defines in Section 2(b) and (c) as the flowering and fruiting tops of the cannabis plant (excluding the seeds and leaves when not accompanied by the tops), by whatsoever the name they may be known or designated, and any mixture, with or without any neutral material, of any of the above forms of cannabis or any drink Bail Appln. No.651/2026 :: 4 :: prepared therefrom. 6. The expression ‘Ganja’ makes it abundantly clear that it refers specifically to the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant, excluding the seeds and leaves when they are not accompanied by the tops. 7. In the present case, as is evident from the First Information Report (F.I.R.), the seizure weighed 32.485 Kgs., which comprised the cannabis elements along with all other parts of the plant. There is no separate record available to indicate the specific quantity of only the flowering and fruiting tops, the precise components that legally constitute ‘Ganja’ as defined under the Act (excluding seeks and leaves). 8. Therefore, at this juncture, prima facie, it remains doubtful whether the alleged offence falls under Section 20(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, and ion the absence of a distinct record quantifying solely the possession of the flowering tops, it is highly questionable whether the total quantity seized can reliably be regarded as exceeding the commercial quantity threshold. 9. In view of the aforesaid reasons, the request of the Bail Appln. No.651/2026 :: 5 :: applicants warrants consideration. 10. Hence the order : O R D E R (i) The Bail Applications are allowed. (ii) The applicants Vishal s/o Ashok Gaikwad, Shubham s/o Chandrakant Jadhav and Pratamesh Ashok Pawde be released on bail upon furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs.Fifty Thousand) each, with one or two local solvent sureties, in the like amount, in connection with Crime No.1073/2025, registered at Sangamner Police Station, District Ahilyanagar for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b), 22(b), 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, on the following conditions that:- (a) The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses in any manner. (b) The applicants shall remain present on each date, unless exempted by the trial Court. (c) In the event of breach of the condition, the concerned Court shall consider the application of the Bail Appln. No.651/2026 :: 6 :: prosecution for cancellation of bail notwithstanding the fact that this Court has passed this order of granting bail to the applicants. (iii) Needless to state that, the observations rendered herein are confined to the present application, and the trial Court shall not be influenced by the same. (SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.) fmp/-