Bail Granted in Commercial Quantity NDPS Case – Supreme Court’s Co-Accused Bail Order Proves Decisive

Case Study

Bail Granted in Commercial Quantity NDPS Case — Supreme Court’s Co-Accused Bail Order Proves Decisive

Case No. R/CR.MA 9963 of 2025 Court Gujarat High Court, Ahmedabad Date 27 June 2025 Bench Hon. Justice M. R. Mengdey FIR C.R. No.11210021221064 of 2022, Katargam PS, Surat City
Bail Application Allowed — Regular Bail Granted
Background

The applicant, Mohammad Aashif Abul Khalik Guliyara, was arrested in December 2022 in connection with an FIR registered at Katargam Police Station, Surat City, alleging that he and co-accused Yakub were found jointly in conscious possession of Mephedrone (MD) in commercial quantity — an offence attracting the stringent bail restrictions under the NDPS Act. The Sessions Court had rejected the bail application at the initial stage. After over two and a half years in custody, the present application was filed before the Gujarat High Court under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023.

The Decisive Factor — Supreme Court’s Co-Accused Bail
The single most significant development that shifted the balance in this case: the co-accused Yakub — found jointly in possession of the same contraband — had already been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. This created an unassailable parity argument that the High Court could not and did not ignore.
State’s Opposition & Court’s Response

The learned APP vehemently opposed bail on the grounds of commercial quantity of Mephedrone recovered from conscious joint possession and the fact that trial had already commenced. However, the Court called for a trial status report on 09.06.2025 — which revealed that while the prosecution had submitted documentary evidence in April 2025, only one witness had been examined — indicating no real prospect of an expeditious conclusion.

The Court applied the three-factor test settled by the Supreme Court — prima facie case, availability at trial, and risk of witness tampering — and placed reliance on Sanjay Chandra v. C.B.I., (2012) 1 SCC 40, reaffirming that bail is the rule and prolonged pre-trial custody is the exception, not the norm.
Relief Granted & Conditions

The application was allowed. The applicant was ordered to be released on a personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety of like amount, subject to the following conditions:

  • Shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, or tamper with evidence.
  • Shall maintain law and order and not indulge in any criminal activities.
  • Shall furnish documentary proof of complete residential address to the Investigating Officer and Trial Court, and shall not change residence without prior permission.
  • Shall provide contact numbers of self and sureties to the Trial Court and inform in writing upon any change.
  • Shall file an affidavit stating details of immovable properties (self-acquired or ancestral) with description, location and present value before the Trial Court.
  • Shall mark presence before the concerned Police Station once a month for six months, between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.
  • Shall not leave India without prior permission of the Trial Court.
  • Shall surrender passport, if any, to the Trial Court within one week. If no passport, shall file an affidavit to that effect.
View Full Judgment (PDF)
Bail Granted by Supreme Court in GCTOCA Case – Despite Prior Bail Misuse & 16 FIRs, Liberty Prevails

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Comments

No comments to show.