Pritesh Agarwal vs Narcotics Control Bureau on 22 April, 2025

April 23, 2025

Delhi High Court

Pritesh Agarwal vs Narcotics Control Bureau on 22 April, 2025

1. These are seven bail petitions filed under Section 439 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure (―Cr.P.C‖) seeking regular bail in NCB Case No.
VIII/16/DZU/2023 u/s 8 (c), 22(b), 22(c), 27-A & 29 Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 (―NDPS Act‖).

Factual Matrix

2. The facts pertaining to the present case are that on 19.04.2023 secret
information was received by the Delhi Zonal Unit that 28 parcels were lying at
DTDC Express Limited, Samalkha, New Delhi, containing narcotic and

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL
MALASIAPPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters Page 5 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
psychotropic substances. Based on the said information, Sh. Harender Kumar
Dagar, IO constituted a team and reached DTDC Express Limited, Khasra no.
16/6, Telephone Exchange Road Village – Samalkha, New Delhi -110037 at
around 11:15 am.

3. After reaching the said office, Sh. Harender Kumar Dagar gave his reason
for coming to DTDC office and shared the secret information. He further
inquired about the following Consignment Nos./AWB kept in DTDC office.

                                                    Sr. No.        Code
                                                    1         Z13669450
                                                    2         Z13669451
                                                    3         Z13669452
                                                    4         Z13669453
                                                    5         Z13669454
                                                    6         Z13669455
                                                    7         Z13669456
                                                    8         Z13669457
                                                    9         Z1S669458
                                                    10        Z13669459
                                                    11        Z13669460
                                                    12        Z13669461
                                                    13        Z13669462
                                                    14        Z13669463
                                                    15        Z13669464
                                                    16        Z13669465
                                                    17        Z13669466
                                                    18        Z13669467
                                                    19        V87616624
                                                    20        V87616625
                                                    21        V87616626
                                                    22        V87616627
                                                    23        V87616628
                                                    24        V87616629
                                                    25        V87616630
                                                    26        V87616631
                                                    27        V87445444
                                                    28        V87445445




Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU     BAIL
                  MALASIAPPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters                            Page 6 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45

4. Thereafter, all the above-mentioned parcels were brought before the
team. 15 parcels were yellow-coloured envelopes and 13 were sky blue colour
envelopes.

5. The sender‟s name on all these 28 parcels was the same being AASK &
Associates, Vipul Business Park, 910, Badshahpur Sohna Rd, HWY, Sector 48,
Gurugram, Haryana 122018, Mob No. 9999665700. Further, Sh. Harendra
Kumar Dagar requested the staff members at DTDC Express Limited to become
independent witnesses to the seize and search proceedings. Shri. Shashank
Kumar S/o Sh. Rajpal Singh present there volunteered for the same. Sh.
Harendra Kumar offered his search to the independent witness which was
refused by him.

6. The team started by checking parcel AWB No. Z13669450. This was a
yellow color envelope on which the name of the sender was AASK & (Illegible)
and the recipient‟s name was Pritesh Aggarwal (Petitioner in Bail Appln.
1863/2024), 7984258114, B/603 Meg Dhanush Apt, Sarelawadi Ghod-Dod-
Road, Surat, Gujrat – 395007. On opening the said parcel in the presence of the
independent witness 25 LSD blots weighing 0.42 grams were recovered, which
is a commercial quantity.

7. The team opened parcel AWB No. Z13669456. It was a yellow envelope
on which senders name was written as AASK & Associates Vipul Business
Park, 910, Badshahpur Sohna Rd Hwy, Sector 48, Gurugram, Haryana 122018,
Mob No. 9999665700 and the name of the receipt was written as Nishant Rawat
(Petitioner in Bail Appln. 3353/2024), Ph- 7456876313, Sitabpur Tiraha Near
Balodhi Type Centre, Kotdwara Uttarakhand, 246149. The parcel was opened in
the presence of independent witness and 10 LSD Blots weighing 0.17 grams
was recovered (commercial quantity).



Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU     BAIL
                  MALASIAPPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters                        Page 7 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45

8. The team opened parcel bearing AWB No. V87616631, which was
addressed to Abhishek Anil. When opened 500 blots of LSD weighing 8.34
grams was recovered from the parcel. Notice was issued to Abhishek Anil u/s 67
NDPS Act. Abhishek Anil is his statement disclosed that the said parcel was
ordered under the instructions of Jithin Cherain (Petitioner in Bail Appln.
4498/2024). He further disclosed that Jithin resided in Himachal Pradesh and
ran a Café called “Echoes of Nature” at Barshaini, Kasol. Additionally,
Abhishek Anil had received 2 parcels containing LSD blots and charas at his
house which belonged to Jithin. Another parcel dated 13.04.2023 was collected
by Jithin in person from Abhishek Anil‟s house on 15.04.2023. Abhishek Anil
on the instructions of NCB had called Jithin over Whatsapp and talked to him
about the LSD parcel. It is alleged that over the phone Jithin told Abhishek Anil
to count and ensure that there were 500 LSD blots and told him to send the LSD
blots to Himachal Pradesh with „some parcel‟ for which Jithin assured booking
tickets. Abhishek Anil also stated that in April 2023, he had received another
parcel containing 10008 blots of LSD.

9. The police issued notice under Section 67 NDPS act on 20.04.2024 and
21.04.2024. On 21.04.2024 in continuation of his previous statement Abhishek
Anil stated that Jithin had informed him that a person would come and the fetch
the LSD blots paper, call was received from Mob. No. 8921209839.Such person
was Lino Lalychan.

10. On 22.04.2023 the NCB issued a notice under S. 67 NDPS Act to Jithin,
thereby he stated that he had booked parcel AWB No. V87616631 in the name
of Abhishek Anil and after receiving such parcel Abhishek Anil would hand it
over to him. He further stated that the said parcel contained 500 LSD blots and
after receiving the same he was going to hand it over to Ganesh, who is working
in a café at Himachal. On 24.04.2023 the petitioner was arrested. On
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL
MALASIAPPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters Page 8 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
24.04.2023, in his „voluntary‟ statement the petitioner deposed that his friend
Joyal Joseph had told him that if they provided a landing address for LSD blots
he would give them a commission and there was no risk in booking it through
the dark web.

11. The team opened parcel bearing no. AWB Z13669453 from which a total
of 50 LSD blots weighing 0.85 grams (commercial quantity) were recovered,
which was to be delivered to Vaibhav Sharma, 7011798441, B- 215 R&D
Building, IIITD Okhla, Industrial Estate, Phase 3, Near Govindpuri Metro
Station, New Delhi 110020. Further on 28.04.2023 accused Vaibhav Yadav
(Petitioner in Bail Appln. 1362/2024) was intercepted when he came to receive
the above-mentioned parcel (recovered 50 LSD blots) at DTDC Courier, Okhla
Ph-II, New Delhi. During interrogation Vaibhav Yadav confirmed his
involvement. He was then arrested on 28.04.2023.

12. During investigation accused Vaibhav Yadav disclosed that he is a student
at IIITD, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase III, New Delhi – 110020. He further
disclosed that the co-accused Arnav Dhankar (Petitioner in Bail Appln.
2409/2024) booked the said parcel through darkweb at his college address. He
further stated that Arnav is his school friend at Venkateshwar International
School and Arnav is presently studying at NLU, Kolkata. Vaibhav further stated
that whenever Arnav came to Delhi he used to come and meet Vaibhav. On one
such meeting he had told Vaibhav that he is on darkweb and he knows many
vendors who deal in LSD. Vaibhav Yadav further deposed that Arnav Dhankar
had ordered the parcels containing LSD twice and had paid through BTC on
darkweb. He stated that as Arnav was a permanent resident of Vikaspuri, Delhi
he had given his college address for booking the parcels. It is further alleged
that Arnav had booked LSD blots at the same address in the name of Vaibhav
Sharma and after booking had shared the tracking ID. When the parcel used to
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL
MALASIAPPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters Page 9 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
arrive the delivery boy would call Vaibhav informing about the arrival of the
parcel and then it was received by the reception guard of the college.

13. On 05.05.2023, notice u/s 67 NDPS Act was issued to the co-accused
Arnav Dhankar in pursuance of which the voluntary statement of the accused
Arnav Dhankar was recorded whereby he admitted his complicity in the present
offence. He further stated that he was a 2nd semester LLM student at West
Bengal National University of Judicial Sciences, Bidgannagar, Kolkata.
Heconfessed that he and Vaibhav Yadav are school friends. Arnav further
deposed that he used buy drugs on Vaibhav‟s behalf and that they are partners in
drug trafficking.

14. The team opened parcel bearing number AWB No. Z13669459 which is
alleged to have the recipient details as Yash Gupta (Petitioner in Bail Appln.
64/2025), 8489764233, 202 Opal Building, GEM Powai Vihar Complex, Powai,
Mumbai, 400076″. It is alleged that 50 LSD blots papers have been recovered
from inside the parcel weighing a total of 0.85 grams. It is also alleged that
during investigation another courier bearing number AWB No. 144629435 was
addressed to the petitioner, but the contents of the said parcel are not known.

15. Further on 27.04.2023, Sh. Narender Saini (owner of the courier office in
Gurgaon) in pursuance of the notice given to him under Section 67 NDPS Act
tendered his voluntary statement. He stated that on 20.04.2023 he received a
call from vigilance team DTDC and they informed him about the 28 parcels
which were booked by his office and were seized by the NCB officials Delhi.
He was further told to keep the CCTV footage/video of the customer who had
booked the said parcels.

16. Thereafter, on investigation on 19.07.2023 the intelligence officer put up
a disclosure that the seizure effected was under crime no. VII/16/DZU/2023 on
19.04.2023 and total 807 LSD blots and 44.7 grams of suspected cocaine was
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 10 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
recovered from different 28 parcels at DTDC Hub, Smalkha, New Delhi. It has
been alleged that the said parcels were booked from Sec 55, Gurugram by Avtar
Singh (Petitoner in Bail Appln. 4831/2024), s/o Sh. Laxman Singh, r/o MCF
414, Near Gayatri Mandir, East Chawla Colony, Ballabgarh, Faridabad,
Haryana. It is further alleged that Avtar Singh is the member of syndicate
namely Zambada cartel.

17. During investigation it was identified with technical assistance and
human intelligence that the parcels were booked from Sec-55 Gurugram. On
19.07.2023, NCB reached the above-mentioned address and after calling out
people residing at the residence one 20-25-year boy came out introducing
himself as Avtar Singh.

18. During search and seizure of the said house, a light green color envelope
containing 02 LSD blots were found. Avtar Singh under his voluntary statement
under Section 67 admitted his involvement and he was then arrested on
20.07.2023.

19. The bail petitions of the following have been dealt with in the present
case: –

S.No. Name of Petitioner Bail Petition No. Date of Recovery of LSD
Arrest Blots

1. VAIBHAV YADAV 1362/2024 28.04.2023 50

2. ARNAV DHANKAR 2409/2024 09.05.2023 50

3. NISHANT RAWAT 3353/2024 16.05.2023 10

4. PRITESH AGGARWAL 1863/2024 19.05.2023 25

5. AVTAR SINGH 4831/2024 20.07.2023 02

6. JITHIN CHERIAN 4498/2024 22.04.2023 500

7. YASH GUPTA 64/2025 01.04.2024 50

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 11 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
Submissions by petitioner in Bail Appln. 1863/2024 – Pritesh Aggarwal

20. It is stated that the petitioner was arrested on 19.05.2023, has spent nearly
1 year 11 months, in custody and he has no criminal antecedents. It is stated that
failure to conduct and conclude the trial within reasonable period results in
prolonged incarceration of the accused and thus militates against the accused‟s
rights under Article 21. Therefore, in such circumstances the accused‟s rights
under Article 21 will prevail over the twin test under Section 37(1)(b), NDPS
Act. Reliance is placed on Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi)
2023 SCC OnLine SC 352, Ankur Chaudhary v. State of MP 2024 SCC
OnLine SC 2730, Rabi Prakash v. State of Odisha 2023 SCC OnLine SC
1109, Pankaj Sahu v. Narcotics Control Bureau, Bail Application 4109 of
2024.

21. It is stated that 6 accused persons including the petitioner were named in
the main complaint dated 16.10.2023. Two additional accused were named in
the first supplementary complaint dated 15.01.2024, two more accused persons
were named in the second supplementary complaint. It is stated that 3 persons
are on anticipatory bail i.e. Joy Mitra, Jyotika Singh and P. Vijai Pranav.

22. It is also stated that the NCB is not separating the present case qua the
petitioner which is leading to no reasonable possibility of the trial commencing
and concluding soon.

23. It is stated that similarly placed persons i.e. Joy Mitra and Jyotika Singh
(recipients of two of the seized parcels containing commercial quantities of
LSD) have been granted interim protection by this Court. It is further been
stated that the mere fact a parcel is being addressed to the petitioner does not
prove that who is receiving the parcel and therefore it is possible for any person
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 12 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
to take the parcel before it reaches the addressee. It is also stated that it is
common for parcels containing contrabands to be addressed to decoys of wrong
names. To ensure that the actual intended recipient of the parcel is identified the
procedure provided under 2 (vii b) read with 50A NDPS should have been
followed by the NCB i.e. the procedure of controlled delivery has not been
followed, which if followed would have taken the matter beyond
suspicion.Thus, the petitioner has been arrested merely because his name was
mentioned on the parcel. Reliance for the same is placed on Sagar v. State of
Himachal Pradesh Cr.M.P. No. 1755/2024 decided on 27.08.2024.

24. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that to raise the
presumption under Section 35, the prosecution has to discharge the initial
burden and then prove the foundational facts. In the absence of such evidence
by the prosecution the presumption cannot be drawn against the applicant.
Subsequently, the presumption under Section 35 NDPS can only be taken at the
stage of trial.

25. It is further stated that no recovery of any contraband has been made from
the applicant and there is no material on record demonstrating any alleged
payment to the Zambada Cartel. The mere fact that the parcel had been
addressed to the applicant cannot indicate involvement of the accused. Also,
there is no material on record to show the applicant has booked the parcel or the
accused was aware of the contents of the parcel.

26. It is also stated that the emails between the DTDC and the applicant are
insufficient to place any culpability on the accused. There is no ticket number
and there is also no complete trail of communication between the applicant and
DTDC. The same therefore cannot be considered as a circumstance which
makes out „personal knowledge as to the existence of the contraband‟ or any
kind of „conscious possession‟.

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 13 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45

27. It is argued that the incriminatory email refers to a package booked on
07.04.2023 and the case of the prosecution is that the parcel containing the
contraband was booked on 06.04.2023. Also it is argued that all the
incriminating screenshots of chats and pictures recovered from the phone of the
petitioner are not direct communications between the petitioner and any other
person but are screenshots posted on a group that the petitioner was part of.
Reliance for the same is placed on Bharat Chaudhary v. Union of India 2021
SCC OnLine SC 1235.

28. Additionally, it is stated that the statement of the petitioner under Section
67 of the NDPS Act cannot be relied upon. It is stated that the parcel slip
discovered from the co-accused Naveen Fogat‟s phone concerns parcel bearing
number 144629428 booked on 11.04.2023, whereas the seized parcel was
bearing AWB No. Z13669450 was booked on 06.04.2023. The parcel slip no.
Z144629428 was part of 14 parcels booked by Edwise Delhi via Trackon
Couriers while the seized parcel bearing AWB No. Z13669450 was part of 28
parcels booked by AASK & Associates via DTDC.

29. It is stated that the slip recovered from the phone of the co-accused
merely shows that a parcel was addressed to the petitioner and there is nothing
to show that the petitioner was aware of the contents of the parcel and that he
ever received/ was in possession of the parcel.

Submissions by NCB in Bail Appln. 1863/2024 – Pritesh Aggarwal

30. On 04.05.2023, Pritesh Aggarwal, s/o Sheo Bhagwan in pursuance of
notice under Section 67 NDPS Act, tendered his voluntary statement. In his
statement, he stated his present address as B-603, Megh Dhamesh Apartment,
Sarelawadi Ghod Dod Road, Surat Gujrat presently. He further stated that after
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 14 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
completing BBA from MIT Pune, in 2018 he was looking after his family
business of textiles. He agreed to the fact that the address and number on parcel
bearing number AWB no. Z13669450 as his, but he further stated that the was
not aware of who had given his number and address and had booked the said
parcel. He denied ever using dark web or Wickerme. He then handed over his
two mobile phones having numbers 7984258114, 9558064629 and 655416672.

31. A notice u/s 67 NDPS Act was issued to the petitioner for further
examination on 19.05.2023. On 17.05.2023 the IO concerned received the data
extraction report of the seized mobile phone from the petitioner. Multiple
incriminating chats and photos of narcotic substances were recovered from the
mobile phone of the petitioner. Additionally, on further analysis an email
exchanged between the DTDC courier service, and the petitioner was also
recovered regarding the tracking of this shipment.

32. In continuation of his earlier statement on 19.05.2023 petitioner stated
that the parcel bearing AWB No. Z13669450 was ordered by him through
Wicker me. He further stated that he had ordered 25 LSD blot papers from one
Zambada Cartel. He stated that he had denied booking the said parcel in his
earlier statement as he was afraid. Petitioner disclosed that Zambada Cartel is a
vendor which deals in all types of drugs on social media and darknet. The
payment to Zambada cartel is made through bitcoin wallets. Petitioner further
confirmed the Email exchange between him and DTDC courier service.
Thereafter, petitioner was arrested.

33. Additionally, on 21.05.2023 petitioner further deposed that that Zambada
Cartel had shared a link to their Bitcoin wallet, thereafter the petitioner paid Rs.
15,000/- cash in conversion for cryptocurrency to someone in Surat and had
then paid Zambada Cartel.

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 15 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45

34. The Investigating Agency i.e. NCB submits that after proper inquiry and
investigation petitioner is involved in criminal conspiracy and has allegedly
been involved in sale, purchase, possession, consumption, import and export
interstate of narcotics and psychotropic substances. This tantamount to an illegal
trade by illegal act and illegal means to misuse social media platforms and is
thus punishable under the NDPS Act.

35. It is submitted that Panchnama dated 19.04.2023 and inventory was
prepared as rules. Further, an application u/s 52A NDPS was filled before Ld.
Duty MM Patiala House Court, New Delhi. It is also stated that Rule 13(1)
required that samples after being certified by the Magistrate be sent directly to
the jurisdictional laboratory. In this case, the Magistrate certified the samples
vide order dated 08.07.2023 (Saturday) and it was sent to the CFSL on the next
working day i.e. 10.07.2023 and thus there has been no delay.

36. Additionally, it is stated by the Investigating Agency that the procedure
for controlled delivery as given under Section 50A NDPS to ascertain the actual
recipient of the contraband is procedural in nature and is entirely the discretion
of the Investigating Agency. The word „may‟ used under the section does not
make it compulsory to undertake controlled delivery.

37. It is also stated by the Investigating agency stated that the weight of the
paper and LSD is an integral part for ingestion of the drug by the user and is
thus covered under „preparation‟ of a substance within the meaning of Section 4
of the Drugs Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985. Reliance is placed on Hira
Singh v. UOI AIR 2020 Supreme Court 3255, NCB v. Anuj Keshwani
Criminal Writ Petition No. 2077/2021 and Rijesh Ravindran v. UOI
AIRONLINE 2021 KAS 1832.

38. Lastly, it is stated that the petitioner had enquired about the above-
mentioned parcel from DTDC and as the said parcel has been seized by the
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 16 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
NCB, it shows that the accused was aware of the contents of the said parcel.
Various pictures including those of LSD blots have also been recovered from
the phone of the petitioner and some chats regarding drugs have also been found
from his mobile phone. Therefore, it is alleged that the presumption of Section
35 and Section 54 NDPS Act is against the petitioner and hence he is not
entitled to be released on bail. It is also stated that there is an embargo under
Section 37 NDPS Act, reliance for the same is placed on UOI v. Aharwa Deen –
200 VI AD (SC) 155, UOI v. Ram Samuj&Anr. – 1993 (3) CC Cases (SC) 22,
UOI v. Thamisharasi & Ors. 1995 SCC (Crl.) 665 (SC).

Submissions by the Petitioner in Bail Appln. 3353/2024 – Nishant Rawat

39. It is alleged by the counsel for the petitioner that there are discrepancies
regarding the date of receipt of the secret information. The complaint copy
states that the secret information was received on 19.04.2023, the panchnama
report states it was received on 19.03.2023 and the seizure report states it was
received on 16.04.2023. It is stated that the three conflicting dates lead to
ambiguity and raises doubts over the authenticity and reliability of the
investigation process.

40. It is also stated that there is a significant and unexplainable delay in the
booking and seizure of the said parcel. The alleged parcel was booked on
06.04.2023 from Gurugram, Haryana and was seized from DTDC Express Ltd.,
Khasra No. 16/6, New Delhi on 19.04.2023. It is stated that this is an anomaly
and is irregular as the courier company (DTDC) claims day-determined delivery
as per their website. It is also stated that this delay impacts the integrity of the
chain of custody, a critical requirement under the NDPS Act.

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 17 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45

41. Further, it is stated that NDPS (Seizure, Storage, Sampling and Disposal)
Rules, 2022 mandates a strict adherence to procedural safeguards for the
seizure, storage and handling of narcotic substances. Deviation from the same
casts serious doubt on the reliability of the authenticity and recovery of the
seized articles.

42. Additionally, it is stated that under Section 55 NDPS Act, a duty is
imposed on the Officer-in-Charge to ensure safe custody of seized articles. It is
stated that there is a failure to show how in the absence of proper documentation
from the prosecuting agency the authenticity of the recovery can be relied
upon.

43. It is further stated that as per the test memo, the samples were dispatched
from the malkhana on 07.07.2023 and were presented before the court on
08.07.2023 and were forwarded to Forensic Science Laboratory on 10.07.2023.
It is alleged that the contraband remained in the custody of the NCB throughout
the night of 07.07.2023. It is submitted that due to delay and the lack of clarity
in the documentation reasonable apprehension about tampering and substitution
during this period have been created.

44. Lastly, it is said that NDPS Act contains rigid and stringent punishment.
It mandates strict adherence to the procedural safeguards. Section 52A NDPS
Act read with Rule 8 and Rule 9 of the NDPS (Seizure, Storage, Sampling and
Disposal) Rules, 2022 states that the sampling and sealing of the contraband be
carried out in the presence of a Magistrate. It is alleged that in the case at hand,
there is a gap in the timeline between dispatch and presentation which raises
doubts about the mandatory guidelines for handling and custody of seized
contraband being followed.

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 18 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
Submissions by NCB in Bail Appln. 3353/2024 – Nishant Rawat

45. It is alleged by the Investigating Agency that on 16.05.2023,
petitionergave his voluntary statement under Section 67 NDPS Act, wherein his
involvement in the offence was admitted by him. It is alleged that he had further
disclosed that he had ordered 10 LSD blots through Wicker Me application from
a vendor „Zambada Cartel‟ using cryptocurrency.

46. Based on his confession and further investigation, it is alleged that the
petitioner was arrested and produced before the Hon‟ble Court on 17.05.2023
where he was remanded to 2 days of police custody. It is stated that the phone
number i.e. 7456876313 which was mentioned on the parcel was recovered
from the petitioner during his arrest.

47. It is alleged that the petitioner disclosed critical information about the
Zambada cartel, disclosing that the cartel was operated via telegram profile
name @Zambadacartel-abot and was exclusively used on the Wicker Me
application for transactions and orders. The cartel allegedly provided a menu
listing various narcotic substances and their respective prices along with orders
placed and payments which were made through cryptocurrency.

48. Further the NCB alleges that on 08.07.2023 data was extracted from
petitioner‟s phone. The said data allegedly contained – drug related chats,
photos of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, a detailed drug menu
from the Zambada Cartel, the session ID of Zambada Cartel and a tracking
photo of the above-mentioned parcel. It is further alleged that this extracted data
corroborated the voluntary statement made by the accused, thus establishing the
link between the petitioner and the narcotic substances.

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 19 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45

49. It is alleged by the Investigating Agency that the evidence collected by it
is sufficient to establish the guilt of the petitioner. Further, due process under the
NDPS Act has been followed and all necessary procedural safeguards in seizing
the contraband and collecting the evidence have been followed. It is also alleged
that the confession of the petitioner recorded u/s 67 NDPS Act has been
corroborated by the forensic evidence retrieved from the phone of the petitioner
and the seizure of narcotics from the intercepted parcels.

50. Lastly, it is alleged that the statement of the petitioner is voluntarily given
and all legal procedures have been followed in recording the statement and is
corroborated by independent and tangible evidence which includes photographs,
digital data and the tracking of the said parcel.

Submissions by the Petitioner in Bail Appln. 4831/2024 – Avtar Singh

51. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has
been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that through the
disclosure statement of Intelligence Officer Mr. Chetan Sharma, the name and
address of the petitioner were revealed for the first time on 19.07.2024 with the
help of technical assistance and human intelligence, however it is stated that this
in direct conflict with the Godown Register, maintained by the NCB itself,
which already listed the petitioner‟s name as early as 19.04.2023. It is stated
that this raises serious doubts and if this is so, though the petitioner did not
admit anything, then the failure to arrest the petitioner immediately after
knowing his identity coupled with the subsequent fabricated disclosure by the
prosecution shows a deliberate attempt to mislead the Court and create a false
narrative.

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 20 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45

52. On 19.07.2024, it is the case of the Investigating Agency that for the first
time NCB through the help of technical assistance and human intelligence got to
know the name and address of the person who booked the alleged parcels from
Gurugram, then this disclosure/statement is contradictory and in contravention
of the Godown Register which is handwritten and on instructions of the Jr.
Intelligence Officer Shri Harendra Kr. Dagar dated 19.04.2023. Moreover, it is
alleged that Form-2 at page 142 of paper book discloses the entry which is
entered in the Godown Register vide entry no. 956 under the signature of Shri
Anil Kumar Tiwary (Malkhana In-charge/Superintendent NCB – Delhi Zonal
Unit). The Godown Register with the same Godown Entry Sr. No. 965 at
column no.1 at column no. 5 at the bottom at serial no. (vii) discloses the name
of the petitioner Avtar Singh (which admittedly as per the case of the
prosecution was entered on 19.04.2023). Thus, it is stated that the petitioner has
been falsely implicated in the case on 19.07.2024.

53. Also, the counsel for the petitioner questions the delay in arrest of the
petitioner if NCB knew the name of the petitioner as early as 19.04.2023.

54. Further, it is submitted that on 20.04.2023 Sh. Chetan Sharma,
Intelligence Officer, NCB Delhi, Zonal Unit, wrote a letter to the Manager
DTDC Hub, Smalkha, New Delhi requesting him to provide the details of the
sender of the parcels. The vigilance department of DTDC wrote an email
wherein they attached a reply to the letter of IO against invoice no.
VIII/16/DZU/2023. In the reply DTDC stated that “Sender has given the KYC
to the booking CP for the booking of these shipments is attached with letter.” It
is stated that a copy of KYC of the sender taken by the booking CP was
enclosed as documents enclosed with the reply. The prosecution has not
produced in the chargesheet the said enclosed document/KYC of the sender and
this casts serious doubts on the fair investigation of the prosecution.
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 21 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45

55. It is submitted that Sh. Narender Saini tendered his statement and stated
that he has a courier office in Gurgaon and took a franchise of the same in 2005.
He stated that on 20.04.2023 he received a call from vigilance team DTDC and
they informed that 28 parcels which were booked by his office were seized by
NCB Delhi and told him to keep CCTV footage/video of the customer. It is
further submitted that despite having taken the mobile phone numbers of the
alleged sender from Sudhir Kumar, the prosecuting agency did not seek
information about the phone numbers till 06.09.2023.

56. Further, it is submitted that on 09.09.2023 the Nodal Officer provided the
information stating the mobile no. 8729096152 belongs to one Shri Naresh
Chander s/o Jagdish with alternate number as 9781739047 and the mobile
bearing no. 9582338480 belongs to one Sonali Sikka d/o Mukesh Kumar Sikka
with alternate mobile no. 8766344545. Important is that the address of the
allottees of the number was also given in the KYC application form so provided
but no statement of any of the said persons is recorded till now.

Submissions by NCB in Bail Appln. 4831/2024 – Avtar Singh

57. It is alleged than on 19.07.2023, NCB raided the residence of the accused
Avtar Singh, at MCF – 414, East Chawla Colony, in the presence of
independent witnesses. During the search, a green envelope containing 2 LSD
blots was recovered from underneath the mattress in one of the rooms.

58. It is further stated that in compliance with Section 67 NDPS Act, Avtar
Singh was questioned who admitted his involvement in trafficking of narcotics,
following which he was arrested on 20.07.2023. It is alleged that during
investigation it was found that Avtar Singh had used a bitcoin account to send
funds to the co-accused Naveen Fogat. It is stated that this transaction indicated
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 22 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
a sophisticated mechanism involving cryptocurrency for funding drug
trafficking activities.

59. It is stated by the NCB that the mandate under Section 52A of NDPS Act,
regarding the disposal of seized narcotics has been duly followed in this case.
Reliance is placed on NCB v. Kashif SLP Crl. No. 12120/2024.

60. It is also stated by the Investigating Agency that the procedure for
controlled delivery as given under Section 50A NDPS to make out the actual
recipient of the contraband is procedural and depends on the discretion of the
Investigating Agency as to how to conduct the investigation. The word „may‟
isused under the section and therefore it not compulsory to undertake controlled
delivery.

61. It is also stated by the NCB that the entry in the Godown register
constitutes a routine, general entry made by the NCB wherein the names of the
accused are recorded upon NCB‟s apprehension. This entry does not in any
manner prejudice the case of the accused.

62. Additionally, it is stated by the NCB that 2 LSD blots have been
recovered from the residence of the accused linking him to the trafficking
operation. There is also a CCTV footage where the parcels were booked and the
same is available. Lastly, there is also a receipt of cryptocurrency transfer from
Avtar Singh to Naveen Fogat.

Submissions by Petitioner in Bail Appln. 1362/2024 – Vaibhav Yadav

63. It is stated by the petitioner in the present case that the mandate u/s 52
NDPS Act has not been fulfilled because of the irregularities committed by the
prosecuting agency during the seizure and sampling proceedings. It is stated that
Rule 3(5) of NDPS (Seizure, Storage, Sampling and Disposal) Rules, 2022
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 23 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
mandates the preparation of a detailed inventory of seized material including
packaging, containers, conveyances and other seized articles which shall be
attached to the panchnama/seizure memo. As per Rule 8, this inventory is
prepared in Form – 4 and applied to the Magistrate u/s 52A NDPS Act. In the
present case, Form 4/inventory has not been prepared.

64. It is also stated the prayer in the application u/s 52A NDPS Act filed by
the investigating agency does not seek certification of inventory as required u/s
52A 2 (a) NDPS. The order of the Magistrate dated 08.07.2023 does not
mention Form – 4 being considered, but it is stated that in a mechanical manner
and despite the absence of inventory and a prayer of certification, an inventory
has been certified. Thus, it is stated that the certification of this inventory cannot
be held valid in law. Reliance is placed on Mangilal v. State of M.P., 2023 SCC
OnLine SC 862 and Yusuf v. State, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1328.

65. It is also stated that Rule 8 of the NDPS Rules 2022 requires for an
application to be made u/s 52A NDPS Act to the Magistrate „at the earliest‟
after the seizure. According to the panchnama/seizure memo the seizure was
done on 19.04.2023 at around 11:30 AM. However, the application u/s 52A was
filed on 19.05.2023 after an unreasonable and arbitrary delay of 1 month.
Further it is stated that an adjournment was sought by the NCB on 01.06.2023
and the samples were finally drawn in front of the Magistrate on 08.07.2023
which is after an additional delay of 50 days. Reliance is placed on Kashif v.
Narcotics Control Bureau, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 2881.

66. It is stated Rule 13(1) requires that samples after being certified by the
Magistrate should be directly sent to the jurisdictional laboratory. In the present
case, however, after the being certified by the Magistrate vide order dated
08.07.2023, the samples were sent back to the godown on the same date and
sent to FSL on 10.07.2023 without any explanation and in contravention of Rule
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 24 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
13(1). Further, it is stated the joint reading of Rules 3, 8, 9, 10 & 12 NDPS
Rules shows that the seizing officer, after weighing the allegedly recovered
contrabands, had to pack them in the same package and containers in which
they were found and then seize the same. In the present case, it is stated that the
seizing officer separated the recovered contraband into ziplock pouches brought
by him from NCB, and not in the original packages/containers.

67. It is further stated that Rules 3(2) requires that NDPS and controlled
substances are found in packages or containers shall be weighed and serially
numbered separately. It is submitted that this has not been done and all
packages/containers have been put together in one pullanda marked „PM‟ as is
apparent from the panchnama/seizure memo. Additionally, it is stated that the
packages/containers/conveyances in pullanda PM have not been de-sealed and
photographed in front of the Magistrate as required u/s 52A NDPS.

68. It is submitted that Section 57 NDPS Act requires the arresting/seizing
officer to make a full report of the arrest/seizure to his immediate superior
within 48 hours of such arrest/seizure. However, in the present casethe applicant
was arrested on 28.04.2024, the arresting officer did not report the seizure of
mobile phone and laptop of the accused to his immediate superior in the arrest
report u/s 57 NDPS.

69. That Rule 10 NDPS Rules, 2022 requires that samples shall be drawn
from each package, but in the present case it is stated this has been ignored and
all the recovered LSD papers have been sent to FSL without any representative
samples. Further only 6 out of the 28 alleged recipients of the parcels containing
contraband have been arrested and the charges have not been framed yet and the
investigation is still ongoing. Reliance for the same is placed on Yusuf (Supra),
Mangilal (Supra), Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi) 2023

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 25 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
SCC OnLine SC 352 and this Court’s holding in Amit Kumar Singh (Supra),
Mohit Bhati v. State (Supra) and Mohd. Kashif (Supra).

Submissions by NCB in Bail Appln. 1362/2024 – Vaibhav Yadav

70. It is alleged by the Investigating Agency that on 05.05.2023, a notice
under Section 67 was served to co-accused Arnav Dhankar, wherein he stated
that Vaibhav Yadav used to buy LSD blots on his behalf and that he and Vaibhav
Yadav are partners in drug trafficking. Vaibhav Yadav is his school friend with
mobile number 7011798441.It is further alleged that the profit earned from
thenarcotic trade was shared between him and Vaibhav. He further disclosed his
Instagram ID as serotonin-donor. Vaibhav transferred Rs. 30000 in his account
during April, 2023 which he changed to bitcoin through the link provided by
Zambada Cartel and transferred the bitcoins to Zambada Cartel. Further the
tracking ID Z13669453 of DTDC for receiving and tracking the parcel was also
provided by him.

71. It is alleged that on 08.05.2023, Arnav Dhankar on being asked in his
statement disclosed to the NCB officer while showing his bank statement the
transaction dated 13.03.2023 from Vaibhav Yadav of Rs. 17,000, he disclosed
that Vaibhav had send the money for placing the order of 50 LSD blots which
was booked through Zambada Cartel in March. Zambada cartel sent him a link
(P2P) to convert INR 17,000 to Bitcoin. Regarding the transaction dated
02.04.2023 it was deposed that Rs. 30,000/- had been sent by Vaibhav for
placing the order for the current seized parcel which was booked through
Zambada Cartel in April, 2023. It is further deposed that Zambada Cartel sent
Arnav Dhankar the link to convert 30,000/- to bitcoin. Vaibhav Yadav also sent
Arnav his bitcoin address to transfer the said amount to him. It is alleged that
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 26 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
the said fact has been further corroborated from the data extracted from the
phone of accused.

72. It is the submission of the Investigating Agency that the panchnama dated
19.04.2023 and inventory have been prepared in accordance with the rules laid
down by the NDPS Act. It further submitted that an application u/s 52A NDPS
was duly filed before Ld. MM Patiala House Court, New Delhi. Also, that rule
13(1) which lays down drawing of samples after certification by the Magistrate
has been complied with, as after certification vide order dated 08.07.2023, it
was sent to the CFSL on the next working day i.e. 10.07.2023 and therefore
there has been no delay.

73. Additionally, it is alleged that the mandate u/s 52A NDPS Act has been
fulfilled and there have been no irregularities with the same.

74. It is stated by the Investigating Agency that the procedure for controlled
delivery as given under Section 50A NDPS to ascertain the actual recipient of
the contraband is procedural in nature and is entirely discretion of the
Investigating Agency.

75. It is also stated by the Investigating agency stated that the weight of the
paper and LSD is an integral part for ingestion of the drug by the user and is
thus covered under „preparation‟ of a substance within the meaning of Section 4
of the Drugs Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985. Reliance is placed on Hira
Singh v. UOI AIR 2020 Supreme Court 3255, NCB v. Anuj Keshwani
Criminal Writ Petition No. 2077/2021 and Rijesh Ravindran v. UOI
AIRONLINE 2021 KAS 1832.

Submissions by the Petitioner in Bail Appln. 2409/2024 – Arnav Dhankar

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 27 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45

76. It has been contended by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner
is not guilty of any offence under the NDPS Act as the parcel bearing number
AWB No. Z13669453 was neither sent nor recovered from the petitioner. It is
also stated that there is nothing on record to show that the payments made by
the co-accused Vaibhav Yadav (Petitioner in Bail Appln. 1362/2024) were in
relation to the said parcel or any other parcel containing narcotics or
psychotropic substances.

77. It is stated that there is nothing on record to show the petitioner made any
payments to the „Zambada‟ cartel for the alleged purchase of the LSD blots
found in the parcel. It is stated that even though NCB has produced petitioner‟s
bank statements, there is nothing to show that the payment of (i) INR 17,000
between the petitioner and Vaibhav on 13.03.2023 or (ii) the alleged payment of
INR 30,000 to Shaik Mahameed on 02.04.2023, have any connection to the
parcels or any illicit substances. The NCB has produced an email from one
„[email protected]‟ stating that Shaik had received INR 30,000 from
the petitioner and had converted the same to bitcoin. It is stated that neither
Shaik Mahameed has been made a witness nor has his statement u/s 67 has been
taken. Thus, it stated that the said email cannot be considered and it only shows
that the petitioner had purchased a bitcoin and no connection with the alleged
offence is established.

78. It is further stated that the NCB relies upon chats alleged to have been
extracted from the phone of Vaibhav Yadav with the petitioner. A perusal of the
report of the private forensic agency with respect to the phone of Vaibhav
Yadav indicates that while the phone number of the petitioner is +91
99532733479, however the number of the chat appears to be +91 9953226190.
It is stated it is unknown who the said number belongs to. The chats of Vaibhav
Yadav are with +91 9953226190 while the number of the petitioner is +91
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 28 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
99532733479, there is no averment that +91 9953226190 belongs to the
petitioner.

79. It is submitted that there is no reference to the parcel or the parcel
conversations between the petitioner and the co-accused which has been
recovered from the phone of the petitioner, except some screenshots recovered
from the phone of Vaibhav, which are accompanied by a report by „Sherlock
Institute of Forensic Sciences‟, which is a private laboratory. It is submitted that
the petitioner has had no contact whatsoever with the rest of the co-accused.

80. The statements made by the petitioner, or the co-accused Vaibhav Yadav
have neither led to any recoveries pursuant to the statements nor has any
material object been recovered. Reliance for the same is placed on
PulukuriKotayya v. The King-Emperor, 1946 SCC Online PC 49 & Jasbir
Singh v. Narcotics Control Bureau, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 134.

81. Further, it is stated that the petitioner, in his statements, is alleged to have
provided the username and password of a Wickr Me account in which there
were allegedly incriminatory chats. The recovery of the username and password
from the statement cannot be said to be recovery in terms of Section 27 of the
Indian Evidence Act as the same is not a material object.

82. It is stated that the chats on social media which do not have corroborative
prima facie evidence to show that such account belongs to the accused, do not
make out a case against the accused. Reliance is placed on Jasbir Singh v.
Narcotics Control Bureau, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 134. Also, the counsel for
the petitioner submits that while the petitioner has given the ID and password of
the Wickr Me account „diamorphine‟, the Wickr Me chats produced by the
NCB belong to „diahmorphine‟ (additional „h‟ in the ID). This indicates that the
ID and password recovered from the petitioner could not have led to message

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 29 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
pertaining to different account and hence these messages cannot be attributed to
the petitioner.

83. Additionally, it is stated that Wickr Me chats indicate that some person
was trying to purchase some contraband for the New Year and cannot by any
stretch be pertaining to the present parcel, which was allegedly booked in April
2023. It is stated that mere WhatsApp messages from the devices of the accused
do not amount to sufficient material to establish a live link between the accused
and co-accused. Reliance is placed on Bharat Chaudhary v. Union of India,
2021 SCC OnLine SC 1235.

84. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner did not
have requisite knowledge of the true contents of the package and therefore
cannot be said to be in conscious possession of the alleged contraband. It also
argued that Court had granted bail to an accused even when the parcel
containing contraband was booked by him on instructions of the co-accused
without having requisite knowledge about the real nature of the contents of the
parcel and the accused was not involved in any other case under the NDPS Act.
Reliance is placed on Vipin Mittal v. National Investigation Agency, 2023 SCC
OnLine Del 3270, Deep Chand Kumar v. NCB, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 3330.

85. Additionally, it is stated by the counsel for the petitioner that the
procedure for controlled delivery as given under Section 50A NDPS to ascertain
the actual recipient of the contraband is not followed by the investigating
agency.

86. It is stated that the paper blots should not have been counted when
determining the quantity of LSD blots recovered. It is stated that LSD appears
in crystalline, liquid and other forms. It is usually dissolved in ethyl alcohol or
another solvent and then dropped or stored onto a carrier, such as a blotter
paper. Thus, to consider the weight of the „preparation‟ or the „mixture‟, it is the
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 30 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
weight of such solvent which is to be included and not the blotter paper, which
is stated to be akin to a bottle in which an alcoholic beverage is stored.

87. It is said that the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Hira Singh v. Union of
India, (2020) SCC 272 has held that the weight of the neutral substance in a
mixture ought to be included while determining the small or commercial
quantity of narcotic drug and psychotropic substance. It is said that the LSD
mixed with ethyl alcohol is the mixture as envisaged in Hira Singh. The blotter
paper is used to store or preserve the mixture and is not a neutral substance.
Therefore, the weight of blotter paper should not be considered. Reliance is
placed on Jagath Ram Joy v. State of Kerala, 2022 SCC OnLine Ker 9824.

88. The counsel for the petitioner also relies on Section 64A NDPS Act
which provides that addicts charged with offences involving small quantities of
narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances will not be liable to prosecution if
they undergo medical treatment for de-addiction. It is stated that the intent
behind the provision is to rehabilitate those who use prohibited substances for
personal consumption. It is stated that if the weight of the blotter paper is also
included in determining the weight of LSD, Section 64A of the Act will be
rendered meaningless as it would be impossible to ever be in possession of a
small quantity of LSD and therefor be eligible for de-addiction treatment. It is
submitted that in the present case, if the weights of the blotter paper are
included, the weight one blot of LSD would be 0.85 grams divided by 50 blots
= 0.017 grams. Thus, one blot of LSD is more than eight times the small
quantity (0.002 grams). It is stated that such an interpretation makes the small
quantity for LSD, provided under NDPS meaningless and ineffective. It is
further submitted that Courts should interpret the law in such a manner so as to
give effect to the intention of Parliament in deciding a small quantity for LSD
and providing the mechanism for de-addiction.

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 31 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45

89. Lastly, the counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner was arrested
in May 2023 and no charges have been framed. There are 10 accused persons, 3
chargesheets and 35 witnesses which are to be examined. Therefore, the trial is
unlikely to conclude in the near future. The petitioner has been in custody for
almost 2 years since 05.05.2023 and has been enlarged on interim bail on
several occasions for surgery, medical treatment and for examinations. Reliance
is placed on Man Mandal v. State of West Bengal, SLP (Crl.) 8656/2023,
Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 SCC OnLine SC 352
and Pankaj Sahu v. Narcotics Control Bureau, Bail Appln. 4109/2024.

Submissions by NCB in Bail Appln. 2409/2024 – Arnav Dhankar

90. The submissions by the NCB for the petitioner in the present bail petition
are the same as that for petitioner in bail petition 1362/2024 i.e. Vaibhav Yadav
and hence are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Article 21

91. The Hon‟ble Supreme Court in a catena of judgments has held that the
rights of a speedy trial of an accused are paramount and in casethe Courts are
unable to guarantee a speedy trial, the benefit of bail under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India must be extended.

92. Article 21 of the Constitution ensures that no individual shall be deprived
of their life or personal liberty except through a procedure established by law.
The personal liberty of undertrial prisoners is a fundamental right derived from
this Article. Until an individual is convicted, they are presumed to be innocent

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 32 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
and entitled to a fair procedure and trial. Courts have embraced the principle
that bail is the norm and imprisonment is the exception. The liberty of an
accused person is of utmost importance and should only be restricted by a fair
and reasonable legal procedure.

93. It has also been held by the Hon‟ble Apex Court that the twin test of
Section 37 of the NDPS Act, must give in to the primacy of Article 21. Reliance
is placed on Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi) 2023 SCC
OnLine SC 352, Ankur Chaudhary v. State of MP 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2730,
Rabi Prakash v. State of Odisha 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1109, Pankaj Sahu v.
Narcotics Control Bureau, Bail Application 4109 of 2024.

94. The common thread in all the aforementioned judgments is that
Constitutional Courts are required to safeguard the fundamental rights of the
accused as guaranteed by Article 21. While special statutes impose strict
conditions for granting bail, they should not be used as a means to detain the
accused indefinitely without a reasonable prospect of a swift trial. Simply
charging an individual under these special statutes should not serve as a
punishment that infringes upon Article 21. A perusal of the cited judgments
indicates that Article 21 takes precedence over the stringent conditions outlined
in Section 37 of the NDPS Act. If an accused has been detained for an extended
period without a reasonable likelihood of the trial concluding, Article 21 will
prevail.

95. In the present case, there are 3 chargesheets and as of today at least 35
witnesses. Till 31.01.2025, the charges had not yet been framed. All the
petitioners in the present case have undergone incarceration for a period of
almost 2 years (ranging from 1 year 11 months to 1 year 9 months).The trial is
yet to begin and keeping in view the nature of complexity and the number of

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 33 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
witnesses to be examined, it is highly unlikely that the trial will conclude in the
near future.

96. The petitioners except the above chargesheets have no other criminal
antecedents. The petitioners are young adults and most of them are pursuing
professional courses. I am of the view, continued incarceration may have grave
implications for them. The Hon‟ble Apex Court in Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain v.
State (NCT of Delhi) 2023 SCC OnLine SC 352observed as under: –

23. Before parting, it would be important to reflect that laws which impose
stringent conditions for grant of bail, may be necessary in public interest;

yet, if trials are not concluded in time, the injustice wrecked on the
individual is immeasurable. Jails are overcrowded and their living
conditions, more often than not, appalling. According to the Union Home
Ministry’s response to Parliament, the National Crime Records Bureau had
recorded that as on 31-12-2021, over 5,54,034 prisoners were lodged in
jails against total capacity of 4,25,069 prisoners in the country. Of these
1,22,852 were convicts; the rest 4,27,165 were undertrials.

24. The danger of unjust imprisonment, is that inmates are at risk of
“prisonisation” a term described by the Kerala High Court in A Convict
Prisoner v. State as “a radical transformation” whereby the prisoner: (SCC
OnLine Ker para 13)

“13. … loses his identity. He is known by a number. He loses personal
possessions. He has no personal relationships. Psychological problems
result from loss of freedom, status, possessions, dignity and autonomy of

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 34 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
personal life. The inmate culture of prison turns out to be dreadful. The
prisoner becomes hostile by ordinary standards. Self-perception changes.”

25.⁠ ⁠There is a further danger of the prisoner turning to crime, “as crime
not only turns admirable, but the more professional the crime, more
honour is paid to the criminal”23 (also see Donald Clemmer’s “The Prison
Community’ published in 194029). Incarceration has further deleterious
effects-where the accused belongs to the weakest economic strata:

immediate-loss of livelihood, and in several cases, scattering of families as
well as loss of family bonds and alienation from society. The courts,
therefore, have to be sensitive to these aspects (because in the event of an
acquittal, the loss to the accused is irreparable), and ensure that trials–
especially in cases, where special laws enact stringent provisions, are
taken up and concluded speedily.

97. While deciding bail petitions under the stringent provisions of NDPS Act
a fine balance has to be achieved between Section 37 of the NDPS Act and the
Fundamental Rights which are enshrined in Part III of the Constitution. The
same has been held by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Ankur Chaudhary v.

State of MP 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2730, wherein the court observed as under:

6. Now, on examination, the panch witnesses have not supported the case of
prosecution. On facts, we are not inclined to consider the Investigation
Officer as a panch witness. It is to observe that failure to conclude the trial
within a reasonable time resulting in prolonged incarceration militates
against the precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of
the Constitution of India, and as such, conditional liberty overriding the

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 35 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
statutory embargo created under Section 37(1)(b) of the NDPS Act may, in
such circumstances, be considered.

7. In view of the above, we are inclined to allow this petition and direct to
enlarge the petitioner on bail on furnishing the suitable bail bonds and
sureties and on such other terms and conditions as may be deemed fit by the
trial Court.

98. Additionally, the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in repeated cases has granted
bail to the accused persons dealing with commercial quantities of narcotics as
under: –

              SLP No.                     Name of Parties         Quantity        Incarceration
          SLP (CRL.) No.                 Chitta Biswas        46 bottles        01 year 07 months
          8823/2019                      alias Subhas v.      containing
                                         The State of West    codeine mixture
                                         Bengal
          SLP (CRL.) No.                 Naeem Ahmed          340 grams of      01 year 11 months
          230/2024                       alias Govt. of       smack
                                         NCT of Delhi
          SLP (CRL.) No.                 Pallab Senapati v.   22.5 Kgs of Ganja 02 years 02
          14344/2024                     The State of West                      months
                                         Bengal
          SLP (CRL.) No.                 Man Mandal v.        99 bottles of     Almost 02 years
          8656/2023                      The State of West    phensedyl syrup
                                         Bengal               containing
                                                              codeine phosphate

99. The Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Mohammad Salman Hanif
Shaikh v. The State of Gujrat SLP (Crl.) 5530/2022 has observed as under: –

As per the allegations, 358 bottles of cough syrup containing codein of
‗commercial quantity’ was recovered from the petitioner.
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 36 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
We have heard learned counsels for the parties and are of theconsidered
opinion that the questions like whether the contrabandrecovered from the
petitioner is of ‗commercial quantity’ orwhether codein phosphate is a
manufactured drug or a narcoticsubstance, need not be go into at this
stage.

We are inclined to release the petitioner on bail only on the ground that he
has spent about two years in custody and conclusion of trial will take some
time.

Consequently, without expressing any views on the merits of the case and
taking into consideration the custody period of the petitioner, this special
leave petition is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on
bail subject to his furnishing the bail bonds to the satisfaction of the
Special Judge/ concerned Trial Court.

100. The quantities recovered from the petitioners are commercial in nature,
they vary between 10 LSD blots to 50 LSD blots. In the case of Avtar Singh
there is recovery of 02 LSD blots which is an intermediate quantity.

Additionally, there is no incriminating material to show that Avtar Singh was the
sender of the parcels. The KYC form given by the DTDC to the respondent
agency has not been filed by the respondents. The alleged bitcoin transaction
between Avtar Singh and Naveen Fogat are dated 22.08.2022 and 07.09.2022
whereas the alleged transaction is supposed to be dated 06.04.2023 (i.e. 6 -7
months post the bitcoin transaction).

101. In view of continued incarnationfor almost 2 years and in view of the fact
there is no reasonable chances of the trial concluding in the near future, I am
inclined to allow the petitions and enlarge the petitioners on bail.

102. Since the petitioners are being granted bail on the principles of Article 21
of the Constitution, I am not commenting on the merits/demerits of the case, as
it may prejudice the case of either of the parties.

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 37 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45

103. From the judgments cited above, it is evident that there is no hard and fast
formula as to what is the minimum period which is to be considered as
substantial period undergone, however, keeping in view that the trial will take
considerable time to conclude, the petitioners in:

 Bail Petition 1863/2024 i.e. Pritesh Aggarwal,
 Bail Petition 3353/2024 i.e. Nishant Rawat,
 Bail Petition 4831/2024 i.e. Avtar Singh,
 Bail Petition 2409/2024 i.e. Arnav Dhankar,
 Bail Petition 1362/2024 i.e. Vaibhav Yadav.

are directed to be released on bail subject to the following terms and
conditions:-

i. The petitioners shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs
50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with 1 surety each in the
like amount, to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court;
ii. The petitioners shall not leave the country without the permission
of the concerned court and if the petitioners have a passport, they
shall surrender the same to the concerned trial court;
iii. The petitioners shall furnish to the IO concerned their cell phone
numbers on which the petitioners may be contacted at any time and
shall ensure that the number is kept active and switched on at all
times;

iv. The petitioners will furnish their permanent address to the
concerned IO and in case they changes their address, they will
inform the IO concerned;

v. The petitioners shall not indulge in any act or omission that is
unlawful, illegal or that would prejudice the proceedings in
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 38 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
pending cases, if any;

vi. The petitioners shall join investigation as and when directed by the
concerned IO and will appear in Court as and when required;
vii. The petitioners shall not communicate with, or come into contact
with any of the prosecution witnesses, or tamper with the evidence
of the case.

104. All the observations made herein above are only for the purpose of
deciding these bail petitions and will have no effect on the merits of the case
pending.

105. The petitions along with pending applications, if any, are disposed of.

Submission by the Petitioner in Bail Appln. 4498/2024 – Jithin Cherain

106. It is stated by the counsel for the petitioner that the conversations between
the accused and the co-accused have no specific reference to the seized parcel or
substances and that there is nothing on record to show that the accused ordered,
received or paid for the LSD blots in question. Additionally, nothing indicates
that the it was not Lino Lalychan but the petitioner, who had received the parcel
from Abhishek Anil, or that it was the petitioner not Lino Lalychan who had
involvement with the said parcel.

107. It is stated there is no prima facie material to show that the petitioner was
aware of the contents of the seized parcel (S. 35 NDPS Act), reliance is placed
on Mohan Lal v. State of Rajasthan (2015) 6 SCC 222 and Union of India v.
Mohd. Nawaz 2021 SCC OnLine SC 1237. There are also significant
discrepancies in the weight of the substance, which was recovered, the weight
of the substance sent for sampling and the weight of the substance which was
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 39 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
sampled. This is stated to be a critical contradiction suggesting alleged
tampering with the substances sent to the CRC laboratory. Hence, it is stated
that the report of the CRC laboratory should be disregarded.

108. It is also stated that Lino Lalychan has been made a witness by the NCB
but neither Ganesh nor Joyel have been made either a witness or accused in the
3 chargesheets which have been filed so far by the NCB. It is stated that Lino
Lalichan despite coming to receive the said parcel during NCB‟s investigation
has not been made an accused. It is stated that the communications between
persons unrelated to the petitioner should not be considered in relation to the
petitioner. Reliance is placed on Bharat Chaudhary v. Union of India, 2021
SCC OnLine SC 1235.

109. It is stated that NCB has failed to produce any document to demonstrate
that Jithin Cherian has made any payments to the Zambada Cartel or to any
other person. It is also stated that statements under Section 67 NDPS are
inadmissible as evidence, reliance for the same is placed on Tofan Singh v.
Tamil Nadu (2021) 4 SCC 1. It is also stated that the statements made by the
accused neither led to any recoveries pursuant to it nor any material objects.
Thus, it is stated that no part of statements of Abhishek Anil, Lino Lalychan or
Jithin Cherian are admissible as evidence.

110. As per the Status Report it is stated that the person who called Abhishek
had made the call from Mob. No. 8921209839 however the number with which
Abhishek had chats over WhatsApp was different i.e. +91 9645745437. It is
stated that the chats on social media which do not have corroborative prima
facie evidence to show that such account belong to the accused and hence do
not make out a case against the accused. Reliance is placed on Jasbir Singh v.
Narcotics Control Bureau, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 134.

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 40 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45

111. It is further stated that despite NDPS Act envisioning a system of
controlled delivery to catch the actual recipients of parcels containing such
substances under Section 50A read with 2 (viid), no such process was followed
by the NCB. Reliance is placed on Sagar v. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2024 :

HHC: 7410, Junaid Hussain Haveri vs. Union of India, Criminal Petition
Nos. 6853/2023.

Submissions by NCB in Bail Appln. 4498/2024 – Jithin Cherian

112. It is stated that the police issued notice under Section 67 NDPS Act on
20.04.2024 and 21.04.2024. On 21.04.2024 in continuation of his previous
statement Abhishek Anil stated that Jithin had informed him that a person would
come and fetch the LSD blots paper, call was received from Mob. No.
8921209839. Such person was Lino, Abhishek Anil had never met Lino before.
On 22.04.2023 the NCB issued a notice under S. 67 NDPS Act to Jithin, thereby
he stated that he had booked parcel AWB No. V87616631 in the name of
Abhishek Anil and after receiving such parcel Abhishek Anil was to hand it over
to petitioner. He further stated that the said parcel contained 500 LSD blots and
after receiving the same he was going to hand it over to Ganesh, who is working
in a café at Himachal. On 24.04.2023 the petitionerwas arrested. On
24.04.2023, in his „voluntary‟ statement petitioner deposed that his friend Joyal
Joseph told him that if they provided a landing address for LSD blots he would
give them a commission and there was no risk in booking it through the dark
web.

113. It is alleged by the Investigating Agency that 500 LSD blots have been
documented as evidence. It is alleged that the photographs of the said seized

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 41 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
items and their packaging was taken, and the tracking details of the said parcel
was verified. The LSD blots were then found to be of a commercial quantity
thus warranting legal action under the NDPS Act.

114. It is further alleged that on the analysis of the data of the phone of the
accused, various incriminating WhatsApp chats between Abhishek Anil and
Jithin Cherian regarding delivery and receipt of the contraband parcels were
recovered. Additionally, it is alleged that call detail records (CDRs)
corroborated the physical movement and interaction between the accused and
their associates.

115. It is also alleged by the Investigating Agency that the statements of the
independent witnesses and the accused have been duly recorded under Section
67 of the NDPS Act, thereby corroborating the illicit activities and confirming
the involvement of the accused.

116. Lastly it is stated by the Investigating Agency that the arrest of the
accused person i.e. Jithin Cherian has been made in accordance with NDPS Act
similarlythe investigating has been conducted as per the legal procedures laid
down in the Act.

Analysis for Petitioner in Bail Appln. 4498/2024 – Jithin Cherian

117. The team opened parcel bearing AWB No. V87616631, which was
addressed to Abhishek Anil. When opened 500 blots of LSD weighing 8.34
grams, which is commercial quantity was recovered from the parcel. Notice was
issued to Abhishek Anil u/s 67 NDPS Act. Abhishek Anil is his statement
disclosed that the said parcel was ordered under the instructions of Jithin
Cherain.

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 42 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45

118. The investigating agency, NCB has recovered photographs of the seized
articles and their packaging from the phone of the present petitioner. The same
is shown below: –

119. This court at the stage of bail is required to see the corroborating
evidence with the statements made under S.67 of the NDPS Act. The seized
parcel was containing 500 LSD blots which was to be delivered to present
petitioner through Abhishek Anil. There are incriminating chats between co-
accused and the petitioner, the same are reproduced under: –

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 43 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 44 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45

120. Additionally, the call detail records show numerous callsfrom the phone
of co-accused Abhishek Anil to the petitioner on 20.04.2023 i.e. on the date of
delivery of the parcel. There is also recovery of photographs of LSD blots and
other contraband from the phone of the petitioner (as above).

121. The statement of Lino Lalychan has also been placed on record to show
that the petitioner had sent him to collect the LSD blots. The petitioner in the
present case had also asked the co-accused Abhishek Anil to count the LSD
blots to ensure that they were 500 in number, and he had further directed to the
send the same to Himachal Pradesh, through Lino Lalychan.

122. With regards to argument pertaining implication of Lino Lalychan as an
accused, in the absence of material regarding the facts pertaining to him (Lino),
this Court is unable to comment of whether the facts of any person linked with
the petitioner are identical to that of the petitioner.

123. A perusal of the aforesaid chats clearly shows active conversation
between Abhishek Anil (consignee) and the petitioner. TheWhatsApp
conversation is regarding the same very parcel which has been seized. To my
mind, the same is incriminating in nature. Additionally, the statement of Lino
Lalychan has also been recorded which shows that it was the petitioner who had
sent Lino to collect the contents of the parcel.

124. Even though, the petitioner has spent about 2 years‟ incarceration and
some other petitioners in the present batch have been granted bail, in view of
the primacy of Article 21 of the Constitution, I am not inclined to extend the
same benefit to the petitioner.

125. In the present case, the 28 parcels have been recovered from DTDC
couriers containing 807 LSD blots. The literature with regard to LSD has been
documented in various articles, wherein it has been observed that LSD is an
addictive and potent drug which can cause high dependency for its users. It is
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 45 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
considered so potent that it is often diluted with other materials. Thus, it has a
high potential for abuse and can lead to severe psychological and physical
effects.

126. The commercial quantity for LSD is 0.11 grams and recovered quantity is
8.7 grams. The parcel linked to the petitioner contained 500 blots which is more
than 75 times of the beginning of the threshold of the commercial quantity. Such
huge quantity of LSD blots coupled with the fact that the respondents are still
identifying the bigger players and unearthing the entire racket involving
multiple players and different layers of concealment, granting bail to the
petitioner at this stage may severely hamper investigation to ascertain big
operators of this cartel.

127. The recovery of 500 blots from the parcel linked with the petitioner
shows the likelihood of the petitioner being a big handler of the narcotics. The
bail granted to the 5 petitioners in the present batch, the maximum quantity
recovered is of 50 blots.

128. The argument of controlled delivery is also not of much assistance to the
petitioner. The procedure for controlled delivery as given under Section 50A
NDPS to ascertain the actual recipient of the contraband, is procedural and
directory in nature and is entirely the discretion of the Investigating Agency.
The same is evident from the use of the word „may‟ in Section 50A NDPS Act
which reads as under: –

[50A. Power to undertake controlled delivery.–The Director General of
Narcotics Control Bureau constituted under sub-section (3) of section 4 or
any other officer authorised by him in this behalf, may, notwithstanding
anything contained in this Act, undertake controlled delivery of any
consignment to– (a) any destination in India; (b) a foreign country, in
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 46 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
consultation with the competent authority of such foreign country to which
such consignment is destined, in such manner as may be prescribed.]

129. Thus, I am not inclined to grant the benefit of bail to the present
petitioner in Bail Petition 4498/2024 i.e. Jithin Cherian at this stage and this bail
petition is dismissed.

130. The observations made herein shall not tantamount to an opinion formed
on merits and de-merits of the case and are only for the purpose of deciding this
bail petition.

Submissions by the Petitioner in Bail Appln. 64/2025 – Yash Gupta

131. On 19.04.2023 during the seizure procedure, parcel bearing number AWB
Z136669459 (Parcel 1) was recovered. This parcel contained 50 LSD blots, and
was addressed to the petitioner Yash Gupta with contact number 8489764233,
residing at 202 Opal Building, Gem Powai Vihar Complex, Powai, Mumbai
400076.

132. It is submitted that the petitioner is being connected to Sarthak Shukla as
the intermediary to order drugs whereas Sarthak Shukla has not been arrayed as
an accused. The phones of both petitioner and Sarthak have been seized but
nothing incriminating was found. It is also stated that the accused previously
received another parcelbearing no. 1447629435 (Parcel 2).

133. It is submitted Parcel 1 bearing no. Z136669459 was never received by
the petitioner and there is no proof that the petitioner had ordered the said parcel
or there was any connection/communication of the petitioner with the other
accused who allegedly have sent the parcel. Additionally, it is submitted that the
courier receipt of Parcel 1 bearing no. Z136669459 does not bear the name of
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 47 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
the Petitioner or other essential particulars such as „description of content‟,
weight, nature of consignment, value of goods etc. and the courier receipt of
parcel 2 bearing no. 1447629435does not state the address or phone number of
the petitioner.

134. The online tracking report does not state the name of the person who
received the parcel. It is also submitted that the tracking report states the actual
weight of the package on 11.04.2023 as 0.030 when it was booked in Delhi
whereas the weight of the package when it was received in Mumbai courier
facility on 13.04.2023 is 0.218. It is stated that this shows manipulation by the
courier agency, and that 0.030 is not commercial quantity and bar of Section 37
will not apply.

135. It is submitted that the role of the courier company has not been
investigated and an arbitrary pick and choose approach has been adopted by the
Investigating Agency. Further, in all 28 parcels the detail of the sender is AASK
& Associates 910 Vipul Business Park, 910, Badshahpur Sohna Rd. Hwy,
Sector 48, Gurugram, Haryana. Ashish Sharma, partner of AASK has not been
made an accused based on his statement that he has not sent the parcels.
Similarly, the mobile number 9999665700, written as sender‟s number was
found to be operated by Rohit who also has not been made an accused based on
his statement. It is submitted that it is common knowledge that the courier sends
SMSs to the given number when a parcel is booked. Where the sender denies
having received the said messages, then the role of the courier company has to
be investigated. When the sender‟s details could be wrong, then it is possible
that the receiver‟s details are also wrong and written to disguise the actual
recipient.

136. It is submitted that the as per para 3 (xvii) of the complaint, AWB No.
Z13669466 was addressed to Paritosh Mehta at his address of Goa and mobile
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 48 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
number is written on the said parcel. From the said parcel 6.55 grams of cocaine
was recovered. In his statement, he has admitted that the address and mobile
number written on the parcel were correct but he did not order any drugs and
has no knowledge of the drugs. The Investigating Agency has not made Paritosh
Mehta an accused even though his case is identical to the petitioner who had
also given a similar statement.

137. Further, it is submitted that it has been alleged by the Investigating
Agency against the accused that photos and psychotropic substances are found
on the data extracted from the petitioner‟s phone. It is not the case of the
respondent that the petitioner took these photos from his phone and the same
were not downloaded them from the internet. Mere possession of photos is not
an offence under the NDPS Act. It is also stated that even the said photos are
not of illegal drugs being sold by a drug peddler. These photos as submitted by
the counsel of the petitioner are downloaded photos of legitimate drugs sold in
America as the labels affixed on them with legal disclaimers are visible on some
pictures.

138. Reliance for the above made submissions is placed on Phundreimayuni
Yas Khan V State, Bail Appln 1383/2022, State vs Pallulabud, SLP (Crl No.
242/22, Abdul Rab v NCB – 2025:DHC:422 and Rakesh Kumar Raghuvashi v
State – 2025 INSC 96.

Submissions by NCB in Bail Appln. 64/2025- Yash Gupta

139. On 19.04.2023 during the seizure procedure, parcel bearing number AWB
Z136669459 was recovered. This parcel contained 50 LSD blots and it was
addressed to accused Yash Gupta with contact number 8489764233, residing at
202 Opal Building, Gem Powai Vihar Complex, Powai, Mumbai 400076.

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 49 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45

140. It is alleged by the NCB that the accused had previously received another
parcel bearing number 1447629435, which has also been sent by Zambada
Cartel containing 50 LSD blots. Additionally, on 07.03.2024, accused in
pursuance of notice u/s 67 NDPS Act deposed his involvement in the offense.

141. It is also alleged that the accused has disclosed having contact with
several local vendors in Mumbai engaged in illegal trafficking of Ganja and
LSD. The contact details of these vendors were further disclosed by the accused
from his mobile phone.

142. It is alleged by the NCB that the drugs have been recovered in the present
case and various images of the contrabands have also been recovered from the
petitioner‟s mobile phone. It is alleged that the details of the petitioner‟s mobile
phonenumbershave been retrieved from the phone of the co-accused.
Additionally, several parcels which were addressed to the petitioner were found
and the delivery status of those was shown as delivered which further indicated
the petitioner‟s involvement and awareness of the narcotic drugs.

143. Lastly, it is stated by the NCB that the recovered contraband is a
commercial quantity, reliance is placed on UOI v. Aharwa Deen – 200 VI SD
(SC) 155, UOI v. Ram Samuj&Anr. – 1993 (3) CC Cases (SC) 22, UOI v.
Thamisharasi& Ors. 1995 SCC (Crl.) 665 (SC)and the presumption under
Section 37 and 54 of NDPS Act is against the accused, therefore he is not
entitled to bail.

Analysis for Petitioner in Bail Appln. 64/2025 – Yash Gupta

144. The team opened parcel bearing number AWB No. Z13669459 which is
alleged to have the recipient details as “Yash Gupta, 8489764233, 202 Opal
Building, GEM Powai Vihar Complex, Powai, Mumbai, 400076”. 50 LSD blots
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 50 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
were recovered from inside the parcel weighing a total of 0.85 grams, which is
commercial quantity. During investigation another courier bearing number
AWB No. 144629435 was addressed to the present petitioner, but the contents
of the said parcel are not known. The petitioner was then arrested on 01.04.2024
and has since been in custody.

145. NCB recovered pictures of the seized contraband and various other
narcotic drugs from the phone of the petitioner the same is reproduced under:

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 51 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 52 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45

146. Additionally,the courier receipts of both the seized parcel bearing no.
AWB Z136669459 and 1447629435 bear only the name of the present
petitioner, the same is reproduced under: –

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 53 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 54 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
\

147. In the present case, the parcel is addressed in the name of the petitioner,
the courier receipt bears the name of the petitioner, the mobile phone of the
petitioner shows various images of contraband substance.

148. Additionally, the details of the of the petitioner‟s phone number have
been found on the phone of the co-accused. Several parcels addressed to the
petitioner have also been shown as delivered on the phone of the co-accused,
Naveen Fogat. This further establishes the petitioner‟s involvement and his
awareness about the contents of the parcel.

149. The petitioner has been in custody for a period of one year and to state
that there is a delay in trial is premature. The respondent agency must be given
reasonable time to conclude the trial and if the same is not concluded within a

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 55 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45
reasonableperiod of time the petitioner will be at liberty to urge the grounds
available under Article 21 subsequently. This court in the absence of the entire
material regarding Paritosh Mehta‟s caseisunable to comment whether his case
is identical to that of the petitioner.

150. Lastly, the recovery made is of a commercial quantity, therefore the twin
conditions given under S. 37 NDPS must be satisfied by the petitioner. At this
stage,there are averments and documents to show that earlier couriers were
received by the petitioner. Additionally, there are photographs of the LSD on the
phone of the petitioner, in this view of the matter this court is unable to give a
finding that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence as charged.

151. Thus, I am not inclined to enlarge the benefit of bail to the petitioner in
Bail Petition 64/2025 i.e. Yash Gupta at this stage and this bail petition is
dismissed.

152. The observations made herein shall not tantamount to an opinion formed
on merits and de-merits of the case and are only for the purpose of deciding this
bail petition.

JASMEET SINGH, J
April 22, 2025
Kamun

Digitally Signed
By:DEEPANSHU BAIL APPLN. 1362/2024 & Conn. matters
MALASI Page 56 of 56
Signing Date:22.04.2025
15:56:45

[ad_1]

Source link

Shiv Narain Pd. Mishra vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 30 August, 2025

Bharatvarshiya Digamber Jain Tirth … vs Jain Shwetamber Society on 18 August, 2025

Tulsi Devi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 August, 2025

30.08.2025 vs Khasi Hills Autonomous District … on 30 August, 2025

Nishi Singla vs State Of Punjab And Others on 28 August, 2025

Shiv Narain Pd. Mishra vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 30 August, 2025

Bharatvarshiya Digamber Jain Tirth … vs Jain Shwetamber Society on 18 August, 2025

Tulsi Devi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 August, 2025

30.08.2025 vs Khasi Hills Autonomous District … on 30 August, 2025

Nishi Singla vs State Of Punjab And Others on 28 August, 2025

Pritesh Agarwal vs Narcotics Control Bureau on 22 April, 2025

Delhi High Court

Pritesh Agarwal vs Narcotics Control Bureau on 22 April, 2025

Author: Jasmeet Singh

Bench: Jasmeet Singh

LEAVE A REPLY Cancel reply

About us

Company

Top Stories

Now Is the Time to Think About Your Small-Business Success

Program Will Lend $10M to Detroit Minority Businesses

Kansas City Has a Massive Array of Big National Companies

Subscribe