Court Cites CDRs, Bank Transactions and Alleged Drug Trafficking Links; Holds NDPS Act Section 37 Conditions Not Satisfied
Jammu, October 21: The Court of Special Judge (NDPS Cases), Jammu, presided over by Special Judge Parvaiz Iqbal, has rejected the regular bail application of Mohd Shakir, a resident of Daryaganj, Delhi, in connection with FIR No. 03/2023 registered by the Anti-Narcotics Task Force (ANTF), Jammu, under Sections 8, 21, 22 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.
In the order dated October 21, 2026, the court observed that the material collected during the investigation, including call detail records (CDRs) and bank account statements, prima facie indicated the applicant’s alleged involvement in the supply chain of pharmaceutical drugs seized in the case.
The court held that the mandatory conditions prescribed under Section 37 of the NDPS Act had not been satisfied and dismissed the bail application.
12 Litres of Onerex Cough Syrup Seized from Bus
According to the prosecution case detailed in the court order, the matter originated on April 5, 2023, when the ANTF Jammu received information that a bus bearing registration number UP82T-7019, parked at the Transport Yard, Narwal, Jammu, was allegedly carrying a large quantity of pharmaceutical drugs.
Following registration of the case, the investigating team searched the bus in the presence of an Executive Magistrate First Class. During the search, a concealed box containing 120 sealed bottles of Onerex cough syrup, each measuring 100 ml, was recovered from the bus cabin.
The total quantity of cough syrup was recorded as 12 litres. The prosecution alleged that the seized pharmaceutical preparation formed part of an illicit supply chain involving the transportation of drugs from Delhi to Jammu and Kashmir.
Court Examines Call Records and Bank Transactions
The prosecution alleged that Mohd Shakir was in contact with the co-accused, Mohd Ishak alias Shaka and Zahid Nazir Sheikh, in connection with the procurement and transportation of pharmaceutical drugs.
As recorded in the order, the investigating agency relied upon call detail records showing communication between the accused persons and bank transactions involving transfers of money.
The court noted that Zahid Nazir Sheikh had allegedly transferred ₹1,64,500 to Mohd Ishak and ₹1,30,000 to Mohd Shakir through IMPS on the directions of Mohd Ishak for purchasing pharmaceutical drugs from Delhi and transporting them to Jammu and Kashmir.
The order further refers to a transfer of ₹30,000 to the applicant’s account on April 2, 2023, three days before the recovery of the cough syrup. The court observed that the amount tentatively corresponded with the alleged cost of the seized consignment.
On the basis of the material placed before it, the court found prima facie grounds indicating an alleged connection between the applicant and the other accused in the case.
Defence Argues No Recovery Made from Applicant
During the proceedings, counsel for Mohd Shakir, Advocate Syed Muneeb, argued that no contraband had been recovered from his client’s possession and that he had been implicated primarily on the basis of statements attributed to a co-accused.
The defence also questioned the evidentiary value of the alleged disclosure statements and argued that the applicant had no direct connection with the recovery.
It was further submitted that the applicant was not required for further investigation and that the main accused and another co-accused had already been granted bail.
Opposing the plea, Special Public Prosecutor Sunil Kumar argued on behalf of the prosecution that the applicant was allegedly involved in the supply chain and that the nature of the accusations attracted the stringent restrictions imposed by Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
The prosecution also expressed apprehension that granting bail could affect the proceedings and sought dismissal of the application.
Court Relies on Supreme Court Rulings
In its detailed order, the court referred to several Supreme Court judgments dealing with bail in NDPS cases involving commercial quantities, including Narcotics Control Bureau v. Mohit Aggarwal, State of Meghalaya v. Lalrintluanga Sailo and NCB v. Kashif.
The court reiterated that Section 37 of the NDPS Act imposes mandatory conditions for granting bail in cases involving commercial quantities. Where the prosecution opposes bail, the court must be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence and is unlikely to commit an offence while on bail.
The order also refers to the Supreme Court’s decision in State of Punjab v. Balraj Singh alias Billa, cited in the judgment as 2026 INSC 618, concerning the requirement to consider both statutory conditions.
Trial Evidence Considered
The court noted that prosecution witnesses had been examined during the trial and observed that the statements recorded so far had not weakened the prosecution’s prima facie allegations against the applicant.
It further referred to the alleged involvement of the applicant in another case of a similar nature while assessing whether there were sufficient grounds to conclude that he was unlikely to commit a similar offence if released on bail.
After considering the prosecution’s material, the arguments advanced by both sides and the applicable legal principles, the court concluded that the requirements for granting bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act had not been met.
Accordingly, Special Judge Parvaiz Iqbal rejected and dismissed Mohd Shakir’s regular bail application on October 21, 2026.
The allegations against the applicant remain subject to adjudication in the ongoing criminal proceedings, and the rejection of bail does not by itself constitute a final determination of guilt.(KNC)
