Pune: A Special Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) court in Mumbai granted bail to accused Lalit Anil Patil and Abhishek Vilas Balkawade in the ₹325-crore mephedrone (MD) case, holding that the investigating agency failed to establish that the grounds of their arrest had been furnished to them in writing.
Special Judge RK Deshpande, presiding over the NDPS Special Court at the City Civil and Sessions Court, Greater Bombay, allowed their bail applications on September 4. The orders were uploaded on September 8.
The two are among the accused in a case involving the alleged manufacture and trafficking of 164.172 kg of mephedrone, valued at more than ₹325 crore.
Patil was arrested on October 18, 2023, and is currently lodged at Yerawada Central Jail. He sought bail in connection with the crime registered at Sakinaka police station under NDPS Act, Indian Arms Act and Maharashtra Police Act.
A key contention before the court was that the grounds of Patil’s arrest had not been communicated to him in writing. His defence also cited the bail granted to several co-accused on similar grounds and sought relief on the principle of parity.
The prosecution alleged that three groups were operating as part of the drug network and Patil was involved in running them. It alleged that Patil, along with his brother Bhushan Patil and accused Abhishek Balkawade and Harish Pant, helped establish an MD manufacturing facility at Shindegaon in Nashik. Jishan Iqbal and Rohit Kumar allegedly assisted in manufacturing the drug, which was supplied to other members of the network.
{{/usCountry}}The prosecution alleged that three groups were operating as part of the drug network and Patil was involved in running them. It alleged that Patil, along with his brother Bhushan Patil and accused Abhishek Balkawade and Harish Pant, helped establish an MD manufacturing facility at Shindegaon in Nashik. Jishan Iqbal and Rohit Kumar allegedly assisted in manufacturing the drug, which was supplied to other members of the network.
{{/usCountry}}The court examined the legality of Patil’s arrest in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Pankaj Bansal vs Union of India and others, which held that the grounds of arrest must be furnished to an accused in writing.
The investigating officer relied on the arrest memo to contend that the grounds of arrest had been supplied at the time of Patil’s arrest. Judge Deshpande, however, noted that the memo did not specify the grounds of arrest and merely recorded that they had been supplied to Patil’s father. The court held that furnishing the grounds of arrest to Patil’s father could not amount to compliance with the mandatory requirement of communicating them to the accused himself.
It also noted that co-accused Harish Pant, Nasir Shaikh alias Chacha, Azhar Asmat Ansari, Jishan Iqbal Shaikh and Shivaji Ambadas Shinde had already been granted bail by the high court on similar grounds. Patil was therefore entitled to the benefit of parity, the court held.
The court also granted bail to Balkawade, whose defence similarly challenged the legality of his arrest on the alleged failure to furnish the grounds of arrest to him in writing. His lawyer advocate Gagandeep Singh argued that the lapse vitiated the arrest and Balkawade was entitled to bail on parity with the co-accused.
Patil has been directed to execute a personal recognisance bond of ₹1 lakh with one or two solvent sureties of the same amount and deposit an additional ₹1 lakh as cash security. He has been directed not to tamper with evidence or influence witnesses, refrain from committing a similar offence, surrender his passport, if any, and not leave the court’s jurisdiction without prior permission. He must also attend the trial as and when directed.