Chibuike Thaddeus Igwe v. State Of Maharashtra
Ashish by ASHISH SAHEBRAO MHASKE Date: 2025.10.13 19:30:25 +0530 ASHISH SAHEBRAO MHASKE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1373 OF 2025 Chibuike Thaddeus Igwe ... Applicant V/s.
The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr. Rounak Naik i/b Mr.Advait Tamhankar, for the applicant.
Mrs. Kranti Hiwrale, APP for respondent - State.
CORAM
: AMIT BORKAR, J.
DATED : OCTOBER 13, 2025 P.C.:
1.
This is an application for regular bail filed under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 read with Section 479 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The applicant seeks release on bail in connection with NDPS Special Case No. 68 of 2023 arising from FIR No. 46 of 2023 registered at Taloja Police Station for offences under Sections 8(c), 22(b) and 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 and Sections 14A, 14B and 14C of the Foreigners Act, 1946.
2.
The prosecution case is that on 10 February 2023 at about 5:50 p.m., Senior Police Inspector B.S. Sayyad of Taloja Police Station, Panvel received specific information from Officer Kasam Dastagir Pirjade of the Anti-Narcotic Cell, Navi Mumbai. The
information stated that a Nigerian national aged between 35 to 40 years, along with another person, would come near the west side of Pendhar Metro Railway Station, under the metro bridge, between 9:30 and 10:00 p.m., to sell the drug Methaqualone (MD).
3.
On receiving the information, Sr. PI Sayyad informed the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Crime Branch and the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Crime Branch, Navi Mumbai over the phone. Sr. PI Sayyad then directed Police Officer Gaikwad to arrange for two male panch witnesses and instructed Officer Ahire to obtain an order to conduct the raid. He also asked Officer Shinge to prepare for the raid and gather all necessary equipment. Around 6:55 p.m., Gaikwad returned with two male panch witnesses and Ahire brought the order authorizing the raid. The panch witnesses, namely Mr. Adnan Imran Ansari and Mr. Kailas Mohan Lokre, were introduced to the police team and their personal details were recorded. Sr. PI Sayyad explained to the panch witnesses the procedure of personal search, seizure of narcotic substances, and arrest as per the NDPS Act.
The panch witnesses agreed to remain present and assist during the raid. The panch witnesses and police officials conducted mutual searches to ensure that no one possessed any contraband before starting the raid. No narcotic substance was found. Thereafter, they gathered the required articles including seals, an electronic weighing machine, sample bags, a laptop, printer, UPS, and narcotic identification kit. These items were also checked by the panch witnesses. The raiding team consisting of Sr. PI B.S.
Inamdar, and Officers Shinge, Taide, Gaikwad, Ahire, along with the two panch witnesses, left the police station in a government vehicle bearing number MH 43 G 508 and a private vehicle bearing number MH 43 W 3584.
4.
Around 10:00 p.m., the team reached the spot and kept watch. Two Nigerian nationals arrived and behaved suspiciously. On instructions from Sr. PI Sayyad, the police team approached them. The accused tried to run but were caught using reasonable force. Upon inquiry, they disclosed their names as Mr. Noson Igoeje (aged 38 years) and Mr. Chibuike Thaddeus Igwe (aged 35 years). The Sr. PI informed them about the information received regarding possession of MD drugs and served notices under Section 50 of the NDPS Act in English. The accused and the panch witnesses signed the notices. ASI Inamdar then conducted a personal search of accused Noson Igoeje. A plastic bag containing a cream-coloured solid and powdery substance was found in his right pant pocket. On being asked, the accused stated that it was Methaqualone.
The contraband was tested in the presence of panch witnesses and the result was positive. The substance was weighed and found to be 25 grams. Out of this, 2 grams were drawn as samples and sealed in two separate packets marked A-1 and A-2 with signatures of both panch witnesses and the Sr. PI.
5.
After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed before the learned Sessions Court, Panvel, registered as NDPS Special Case No. 68 of 2023.
6.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the quantity allegedly recovered is 25 grams, which is a small quantity under the NDPS Act. The commercial quantity for Methaqualone is 500 grams. Hence, the bar under Section 37 does not apply. The applicant has been in custody since 11 February 2023, for more than two and a half years. Considering the small quantity involved, he prayed for release on bail. He further submitted that the applicant is willing to abide by conditions similar to those imposed by this Court in Criminal Miscellaneous (Bail) No. 585 of 2021 in the case of Ugochukwu Solomon Ubabuko v. Union of India (NCB) and another, decided on 21 October 2021 at Goa. 7.
The learned APP opposed the application on the ground that the applicant is a foreign national and not a resident of India. His passport has expired, and if released, there is a likelihood that he may abscond and not attend the trial. Hence, it was argued that the bail application deserves to be rejected. 8.
On examining the material placed on record, it is clear that the quantity of contraband allegedly found in possession of the applicant is 25 grams of Methaqualone. As per the Notification issued under the NDPS Act, 1985, the quantity of 25 grams falls within the category of "small quantity", whereas 500 grams and above constitutes "commercial quantity". This distinction is of legal significance because the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act apply only in cases involving commercial quantity. Therefore, the statutory restrictions on granting bail under Section 37 are not attracted to the present case.
9.
The prosecution has not placed any material to suggest that the applicant was involved in a larger drug trafficking network or that the recovery was part of any organized or continuing illegal activity. The record only indicates personal possession of a small quantity, which, even if accepted at face value, would not indicate an offence of grave magnitude warranting continued detention. 10.
It is further seen from the jail record that the applicant has remained in custody since 11 February 2023. Thus, he has undergone incarceration for more than two and a half years. The investigation is complete and the charge-sheet has already been filed. Therefore, no purpose will be served by keeping the applicant in further custody pending trial. The presumption of innocence continues till conviction, and prolonged detention before the conclusion of trial amounts to pre-trial punishment, which the law does not permit.
11.
The apprehension expressed by the learned APP that the applicant is a foreign national and may abscond can be addressed through suitable conditions. This Court, in Ugochukwu Solomon Ubabuko (Supra), faced a similar situation where a foreign national was granted bail subject to strict conditions ensuring his presence during the trial. Those conditions included surrendering of passport, regular attendance before the trial court, and furnishing of adequate sureties.
12.
Applying the same reasoning, the Court finds it appropriate to direct that similar safeguards be imposed here. The applicant can be directed to surrender his passport to the Investigating
Officer, report to the local police station periodically, and furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court. Such measures would ensure that the applicant remains available for trial and at the same time, his right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution is protected.
13.
Considering the nature of the offence, the quantity involved, the period of custody already undergone, and absence of any material showing risk of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses, the Court finds no justifiable ground to continue his detention. The object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused during trial, not to impose a punitive measure prior to conviction.
14.
Hence, the applicant deserves to be released on bail subject to appropriate and stringent conditions that ensure his presence before the Court and prevent misuse of liberty. 15.
Hence, following order is passed:
i) The Applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing PR bond of Rs. 50,000/ (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) and a surety in the like amount.
ii) The release of the Applicant shall be subject to production of a valid passport and visa. The Applicant will have to apply for the renewal from jail and in this context, the Respondent-authorities shall provide assistance to the Applicant. But it is made clear that without production of valid passport and visa, the Applicant shall not be released
on bail.
(iii) Upon the Applicant producing such valid passport and visa, the same shall be deposited with the Investigating Officer.
(iv) The Applicant shall register himself on the basis of the valid passport and visa, with the Foreigners Regional Registration Officer (FRRO) at Bombay.
(v) The Applicant shall report to the officer of the Narcotics Control Bureau at Bombay, on every Monday between 10.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon, during pendency of the trial.
(vi) The Applicant shall attend each and every date of proceedings before the Trial/Special Court.
(vii) The Applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra during the pendency of the trial.
(viii) The Applicant shall not himself or through any other person, tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses. (ix) The Applicant shall produce proof of his residence and address in the State of Maharashtra within ten days of release and he shall also give the details of his contact numbers to the Investigating Officer.
(x) The Applicant shall not indulge in any such activity for which he is being prosecuted in the present case and the other cases pending against him.
16.
Needless to say, the violation of any of the aforesaid conditions would make the Applicant liable for cancellation of bail. 17.
Application is disposed of.
(AMIT BORKAR, J.)