Read Time: 05 minutes
The court after considering Khan’s involvement in dealing with contrabands and his habitual engagement denied bail to him stating that there is reasonable ground to believe that the applicant would commit a similar offense
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Bharathi Dangre of the Bombay High Court denied bail to Actor Ajaz Khan, accused of financing for illicit trade in drugs under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985.
The Bombay High Court relied on the statement of the witnesses, that Khan had procured weed/charas from multiple people on multiple occasions. Further, one of the witnesses recorded in his statement that the applicant used to indulge young persons, by selling and supplying pills and drugs.
The court rejected the contentions of advocate Satish Maneshinde, that commercial quantity was not found with the applicant. The court noted that commercial quantity was found from the co-accused. Further, the court stated that the accused was already on bail in a previous case, in which a non-commercial quantity of contraband was found with him and that the present offense was committed while the applicant was on bail in a previous case. The court while justifying the denial of bail to Khan noted that there is reasonable ground to believe that the applicant would commit a similar offense if he is given bail in the present case.
The High Court in its order noted that the nexus of the applicant with the co-accused with whom commercial quantity is found cannot be ruled out due to the habitual engagement of the applicant in dealing with contraband.
Justice Bharathi Dangre noted that
“His involvement in the alleged conspiracy with the other accused in illicit drug trafficking is, prima facie, established from the material compiled in the charge sheet and, since, I am not satisfied that there exist reasonable grounds to believe that he is not guilty of the offense punishable under the Act, I do not deem it fit to restore his liberty”
The court while denying bail to Ajaz Khan further noted that:
“The length of the period of custody or the fact that the charge[1]sheet has been fled, but the trial has not commenced itself cannot be a ground for releasing the applicant on bail, when he failed to cross the rigors of Section 37. Hence, the application deserves rejection and is accordingly rejected.”
Case Title: Ajaz Mohammad Shaf Khan versus Union of India & Anr.
Please Login or Register
