Himanshu Rana @ Mohit Kaushik S/O Shiv Kumar v. Union Of India
1 of 2 905.BA.1449.2024.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1449 OF 2024 Himanshu Rana @ Mohit Kaushik s/o Shiv Kumar, Age 33 years, R/o.C/32, First Floor, Kakrola Sector 16-A, Dwarka, New Delhi-110078.
Applicant versus
1. Union of India through DRI, Raigad.
2. The State of Maharashtra Respondents Ms.Ashwini Achari with Mr.Taraq Sayed, Advocate for Applicant. Ms.R.R.Thakher for Respondent no.1 UOI.
Mrs.Geeta P.Mulekar, APP, for State.
CORAM :
ANIL S.KILOR, J.
DATE :
20th December 2024 PC :
1.
Heard.
2.
By this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the applicant is seeking bail in NDPS Special Case No.42 of 2022 pending before learned Sessions Court, Panvel arising of crime registered by DRI, Nhava Sheva-2, Mumbai Zonal Unit, Mumbai for the offences u/s.8(c) r/w 22(c), 23(c), 29, 20 and 31 of NDPS Act, 1985 on 29-9-2021.
3.
Having gone through the charge sheet and the material collected by the Investigating Officer during investigation, it is MANISH SURESHRAO THATTE Date: 2024.12.20 13:22:59 +0530 MANISH SURESHRAO THATTE evident that the offence is very serious and the quantity of seized contraband is huge. Though learned counsel for Applicant argues that Applicant had no knowledge of such contraband or he is not
2 of 2 905.BA.1449.2024.doc connected with the alleged offence, the panchanama as regards seizure of contraband speaks volume. Furthermore, the complaint filed before the Sessions Court by the Intelligence Officer against the Applicant narrates the prosecution story and also the role of Applicant.
4.
Learned APP while opposing the application has drawn the attention of this Court to the role attributed to the Applicant in the complaint. Thus, considering the seriousness of the offence and the role attributed to the Applicant, I am of the opinion that this is not a fit case for grant of bail. Accordingly it is rejected. (ANIL S.KILOR, J.) MST