Court rejects discharge plea of Nigerian national in 826-g cocaine smuggling case

Special judge RR Patare rejected the application filed by Chima Progress Chukwu, an accused in a case stemming from a probe by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI). The court held that there was sufficient material linking him to the alleged offence

Mumbai: A special NDPS court has refused to discharge a Nigerian national accused in a cocaine trafficking case, observing that the material on record establishes a prima facie case and warrants the framing of charges.

Court rejects discharge plea of Nigerian national in 826-g cocaine smuggling case

Special judge RR Patare rejected the application filed by Chima Progress Chukwu, an accused in a case stemming from a probe by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI). The court held that there was sufficient material linking him to the alleged offence.

According to the prosecution, 826 grams of cocaine—classified as a commercial quantity—was seized from a co-accused who had allegedly imported the contraband into India and was to deliver it to Chukwu at Palm Beach Road in Sanpada, Navi Mumbai.

The court noted that case records, including the panchnama and disclosure statements, indicate that the accused had reached the designated spot to receive the consignment. It also took into account material suggesting financial transactions between the two accused, supporting the prosecution’s claim of a nexus.

Chukwu had sought discharge under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, arguing that he was falsely implicated based solely on the statement of a co-accused, without any independent corroborative evidence. The prosecution opposed the plea, maintaining that the investigation had yielded sufficient material to proceed against him.

Rejecting the contention, the court observed that there was a “specific allegation” that the accused had come to collect the contraband, and that the available material was adequate to form a strong suspicion of his involvement. Referring to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Sajjan Kumar v. CBI, the judge reiterated that at the stage of discharge, the court is only required to assess whether the material raises a strong suspicion, and not conduct a detailed evaluation of evidence.

Holding that the defence arguments pertain to factual disputes that must be tested during trial, the court dismissed the application, paving the way for the case to proceed to the stage of framing of charges.