BA-2540-25 (+6) check.odt1 v. The State Of MaharashtraWITHBAIL APPLICATION NO. 184 OF 2026

935-BA-2540-25 (+6) check.odt1IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABAD935 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 574 OF 2026 Rizwan Khan Rashid KhanVERSUSThe State Of MaharashtraWITHBAIL APPLICATION NO. 184 OF 2026 Sayyed Arbaj Sayyed Feroj Alias Arbaj KhanVERSUSThe State Of MaharashtraWITHBAIL APPLICATION NO. 2540 OF 2025 Sameer Yunus ShaikhVERSUSThe State Of MaharashtraWITHBAIL APPLICATION NO. 233 OF 2026 Sohel Karim Sayyed Alias Sonu ManseVERSUSThe State Of MaharashtraWITHBAIL APPLICATION NO. 467 OF 20261. Avinash Ramkrushna Patil 2. Rupesh S/o. Ramkrushna PatilVERSUSThe State Of MaharashtraWITHBAIL APPLICATION NO. 183 OF 2026 Sohel Salim HilabiVERSUSThe State Of Maharashtra 935-BA-2540-25 (+6) check.odt2WITHBAIL APPLICATION NO. 187 OF 2026 Javed Khan Rauf KhanVERSUSThe State Of Maharashtra......Mr. C.C. Deshpande, Advocate h/f Mr. Suyog S. Rathi, Advocate for Applicant in BA/2540/2025Mr. R.R.Kakani, Advocate for Applicant in BA/574/2026Mr. V.S. Wakale, Advocate for Applicants in BA/184/2026, BA/183/2026and BA/187/2026Mr. S.M. Nannaware, Advocate for Applicant in BA/233/2026Mr. R.M. Bhosle, Advocate for Applicants in BA/467/2026Mr. K.K. Naik, AGP for Respondent-State in all BAs...... CORAM: SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATE: 17 JUNE, 2026PER COURT :

Learned the learned counsel for the respective applicants and thelearned APP for respondent-State in all the applications.

After hearing the learned counsel for some time and upon this Courtexpressing disinclination to grant relief to applicant Rizwan Khan RashidKhan in Bail Application No.574 of 2026, applicant Sohel S/o Karim Sayyed@ Sonu Manse in Bail Application No.233 of 2026 and applicant No.1Avinash Ramkrushna Patil in Bail Application No.467 of 2026, the learnedcounsel appearing for the respective applicants seek leave to withdraw theapplications.

Leave granted. 935-BA-2540-25 (+6) check.odt34.Bail Application Nos.233 of 2026 and 574 of 2026 stand dismissed aswithdrawn. Bail Application No.467 of 2026 stands dismissed as withdrawninsofar as applicant No.1 – Avinash Ramkrushna Patil is concerned. I,therefore, proceed to decide Bail Application No.2540 of 2025, BailApplication Nos.184 of 2026, 183 of 2026, 187 of 2026 and Bail ApplicationNo.467 of 2026 to the extent of applicant No.2.

By these applications, the applicants seek their release on bail inconnection with Crime No.279 of 2025 registered with Waluj Police Station, District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 21, 21(b), 22(b), 22(c), 25, 27-A and 29 of the NarcoticDrugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985, Section 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 18(c) and 27(b) of the Drugsand Cosmetics Act, 1940.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 12.09.2025, the policereceived specific secret information that a well-organized racket wasoperating for illegal sale and distribution of intoxicating cough syrupcontaining Codeine Phosphate to young boys and girls, particularly students. It was learnt that accused Avinash Ramkrushna Patil and RupeshRamkrushna Patil had procured a consignment of Codeine-based coughsyrup from Rayyan Medical Stores, Uttar Pradesh, and the same was to bedelivered through VRL Logistics at Waluj. Acting upon the said information, the police laid a trap. 935-BA-2540-25 (+6) check.odt47.Prosecution case in brief is that at about 2.30 p.m., one personarrived at the premises of VRL Logistics in a Swift car, produced the deliveryreceipt on his mobile phone and sought delivery of the consignment. Upontaking possession of the consignment, he was apprehended. Duringinvestigation, he disclosed his name as Avinash Ramkrushna Patil. Theconsignment was searched in the presence of panch witnesses and wasfound to contain 20 boxes comprising 128 bottles of Raytuss Syrupcontaining Codeine Phosphate and Triprolidine Hydrochloride. The saidarticles came to be seized under a panchnama. During interrogation, Avinash Patil disclosed that he and his associates had procured theconsignment in the name of a medical establishment and were illegallyselling and distributing the same through a network of associates andpeddlers for monetary gain. Investigation further revealed the involvementof several other persons including the present applicants, resulting in filingof charge-sheet against 47 accused persons.

Learned counsel Mr. C.C. Deshpande, holding for learned counsel Mr.Suyog Rathi for the applicant in Bail Application No.2540 of 2025, submitsthat there are 47 accused arraigned in the charge-sheet. Inviting myattention to the statements of the Godown Manager, the Godown In-chargeof VRL Logistics and other employees recorded during investigation, appearing at page Nos.335, 338 and 342 of the charge-sheet compilation, hesubmits that none of the said witnesses has identified the present applicant 935-BA-2540-25 (+6) check.odt5as the person who had received or taken delivery of the seized consignment. He further submits that the arrest of the applicant is contrary to the law laiddown by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mihir Rajesh Shah Vs. State of Maharashtra (Criminal Appeal No.2195 of 2025). He also places relianceupon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dr. Rajinder Rajan Vs.Union of India [Criminal Appeal No.____ of 2026 arising out of SLP (Crl.)No.3326 of 2026], particularly paragraphs 8, 21 and 22 thereof, andsubmits that the Apex Court has reiterated that where the grounds of arrestare merely stated to have been orally communicated, it is incumbent uponthe arresting officer to furnish written grounds of arrest to the accusedbefore production before the Magistrate. According to him, the saidmandate has not been followed in the present case and, therefore, the arrestitself stands vitiated. He further submits that investigation is complete, charge-sheet has been filed and there is no material demonstrating theapplicant's involvement in the alleged offence. He therefore prays for grantof bail.

Learned counsel Mr. V.S. Wakale appearing for the applicants in BailApplication Nos.184 of 2026, 183 of 2026 and 187 of 2026 submits thatthere is no Call Detail Record connecting the applicants with the seizure ofthe contraband. He further submits that there is no WhatsAppcommunication, electronic evidence or scientific material demonstratingtheir involvement in the alleged offence. According to him, no recovery has 935-BA-2540-25 (+6) check.odt6been effected from the applicants and no material showing consciouspossession of the contraband has been collected during investigation. Hesubmits that no chemical analysis report was available at the time ofregistration of the crime and the applicants have been implicated merely onthe basis of suspicion. He further submits that the investigation is complete, charge-sheet has been filed and, therefore, continued incarceration of theapplicants is unwarranted. He relies upon order passed by this Court inBA/425/2026 and order passed by Principal Seat at Bombay inBA/3846/2024 and order passed by the Patna High Court in Criminal Misc. Application No.20517/2026, granting bail in similar circumstances.

Learned counsel Mr. M.R. Bhosale appearing for applicant No.2 in Bail Application No.467 of 2026 submits that the applicant is falselyimplicated in the crime. He submits that there is no material demonstratinghis direct participation in the alleged transaction. He submits that nothingremains to be recovered from the applicant and, therefore, his furtherdetention is not necessary. He adopts the submissions advanced on behalf ofthe other applicants and prays for grant of bail.

Per contra, learned APP vehemently opposed the applications. Hesubmits that the offence is of an extremely serious nature involvingorganized trafficking of narcotic substances under the guise of medicinalproducts. The investigation has revealed the existence of a well builtsyndicate operating across different States for procurement, transportation, 935-BA-2540-25 (+6) check.odt7storage and distribution of Codeine-based cough syrup. The presentapplicants are not innocent, active participants in the criminal conspiracy.

Learned APP further submits that the investigation has revealedcontinuous contact amongst the accused persons and their involvement inthe illegal trade through financial transactions and other incriminatingmaterial. According to him, the role of each accused cannot be viewed inisolation as the offence has been committed in furtherance of a criminalconspiracy. He submits that the contraband was being supplied to youngboys and girls, including students, and the activities of the accused haveserious repercussions on public health and society at large.

Learned APP submits that there is sufficient material collected duringinvestigation showing the involvement of the applicants in procurement, transportation and distribution of the contraband. He submits thatconsidering the gravity of the offence, the organized nature of the crime andthe role attributed to the applicants, Section 37 of the NDPS Act wouldapply. He further submits that if released on bail, there is every possibility ofthe applicants absconding, influencing witnesses, tampering withprosecution evidence and indulging in similar activities. He therefore praysfor rejection of the applications.

I have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused theFIR, charge-sheet and the material placed on record. 935-BA-2540-25 (+6) check.odt815.Learned counsel for the applicant in Bail Application No.2540 of2025 has heavily relied upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Courtin Mihir Rajesh Shah (supra) and Dr. Rajinder Rajan (supra), particularlyparagraphs 8, 21 and 22 thereof, to contend that written grounds of arrestwere not supplied to the applicant and consequently the arrest standsvitiated.

However, a perusal of paragraph 58 of the judgment in Mihir RajeshShah (supra) shows that the Hon'ble Supreme Court itself clarified that theprocedure regarding written communication of grounds of arrest wouldgovern arrests "henceforth". The relevant observations read thus:-"58. We are cognizant that there existed no consistent or bindingrequirement mandating written communication of the grounds of arrest forall offences. Holding as above, in our view, would ensure implementation ofthe constitutional rights provided to an arrestee as engrafted under Article22 of the Constitution of India in an effective manner. Such clarity onobligation would avoid uncertainty in the administration of criminal justice. The ends of fairness and legal discipline therefore demand that thisprocedure as affirmed above shall govern arrests henceforth. "

In the present case, the arrest of the applicant had already takenplace prior to the pronouncement of the aforesaid judgment. Prima facie, therefore, the benefit flowing from the said decision would not enure to theapplicant at this stage. Consequently, the contention regarding allegedillegality of arrest cannot, by itself, constitute a ground for grant of bail inthe facts of the present case.

On perusal of the investigation papers, it appears that applicant No.2- Rupesh Patil in Bail Application No.467 of 2026 had allegedly arranged 935-BA-2540-25 (+6) check.odt9procurement of the contraband and had financial transactions with co-accused connected with the seized consignment. Applicant Sameer YunusShaikh in Bail Application No.2540 of 2025 was found to have reached thespot for receiving the contraband and had financial dealings with co-accusedRizwan Khan. Applicant Sohel Salim Hilabi in Bail Application No.183 of2026 was found to have monetary transactions with co-accused RizwanKhan. Applicant Javed Khan Rauf Khan in Bail Application No.187 of 2026was found to be in regular contact with co-accused Rupesh Patil and GudduKhan. Applicant Sayyed Arbaj Sayyed Feroj @ Arbaj Khan in Bail ApplicationNo.184 of 2026 was found connected with several co-accused persons. Theinvestigation thus discloses a chain of interconnected activities linking theapplicants with the alleged conspiracy.

The offence alleged is not an isolated act committed by anindividual. Prima facie, the material collected during investigation revealsthe existence of an organised syndicate engaged in diversion, procurementand illegal distribution of Codeine-based cough syrup. The role attributed tothe applicants cannot be viewed independently but is required to beexamined in the backdrop of the larger conspiracy unearthed duringinvestigation. The material on record indicates active coordination amongstthe accused persons in carrying out the illegal trade.

The investigation further indicates that the contraband was beingsupplied to young boys and girls, including school and college-going 935-BA-2540-25 (+6) check.odt10students, for intoxicating purposes. Such activities have serious adverseconsequences on public health and are capable of destroying the future ofthe younger generation. Narcotic offences of this nature are offences notmerely against an individual but against society as a whole. The societalimpact of such activities is a relevant consideration while deciding anapplication for bail under the NDPS Act. 21. At this stage, there is sufficient material collected duringinvestigation showing prima facie involvement of the applicants in thealleged offence. Having regard to the nature and gravity of the accusations, the role attributed to the applicants, the material indicating conspiracy andfinancial transactions amongst the accused, the rigours of Section 37 of theNDPS Act and the possibility of the applicants influencing witnesses orindulging in similar activities if released on bail, this Court is not satisfiedthat there are reasonable grounds for believing that the applicants are notguilty of the offences alleged against them. Consequently, I am not inclinedto exercise the discretion in favour of the applicants. 22. Accordingly, Bail Application No.2540 of 2025, Bail ApplicationNo.184 of 2026, Bail Application No.183 of 2026, Bail Application No.187 of2026 and Bail Application No.467 of 2026, insofar as applicant No.2 isconcerned, stand rejected. [ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ] JUDGES P Rane