Interim Order 18

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF JITENDRA PRATAP SINGH
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE /SPECIAL JUDGE (NDPS),
NEW DELHI DISTRICT, PATIALA HOUSE COURTS,
NEW DELHI
IA 5/26 SC 102/23
NCB VS NNAKA
02.04.2026
ORDER
1. Vide this order, I shall decide the bail application filed on
behalf of the applicant/accused Nnaka Christian Ilechukwu @
Efe @ Sylvester Chinedu Nnaka seeking regular bail in the
present case registered under Sections 21/23/29 NDPS Act.
2. It is submitted by Ld. Counsel for the applicant/accused
that there is no other bail application preferred by the present
applicant/accused which is pending disposal before the Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India, before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi,
or any other Court in the present case FIR.
3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 14.09.2022,
on the basis of specific intelligence, officers of Narcotics Control
Bureau intercepted a parcel lying at UPS Express Pvt. Ltd., IGI
Airport, New Delhi. Upon examination of the parcel, two ladies
handbags were found inside the carton box. Upon examination
of the parcel cutting open the concealed cavities in the bottom
portion of the handbags, white crystalline substance concealed
page no. 1 of 10
-- 1 of 10 --
therein was recovered. The substance was tested using field
testing kit and was found positive for Amphetamine,
subsequently found to be Methamphetamine as per the CRCL
report.
4. The total weight of the recovered contraband was
approximately 360 grams Methamphetamine, which falls under
commercial quantity under the NDPS Act.
5. During investigation, it was revealed that the said parcel
had been booked by co-accused Saraswati Thakur from Jaipur.
Her statement was recorded during investigation wherein she
disclosed that she had booked the parcel at the instance of the
present applicant who had supplied her the handbags containing
contraband and instructed her to book and send the parcel abroad.
6. During investigation, the present applicant was
apprehended and from his residence various incriminating
articles including parcel booking related documents, weighing
machine and mobile phones were recovered.
7. Investigation further revealed that photographs of the
present applicant along with co-accused Saraswati Thakur were
found in a mobile phone which picture is part of the complaint.
page no. 2 of 10
-- 2 of 10 --
8. It has further come on record that the statement of one
Saddam was recorded during investigation who stated that he had
transferred a sum of Rs. 1,300/- to the bank account of Umakant
Thakur, the husband of co-accused Saraswati Thakur, at the
instance of the present applicant for the purpose of travel
expenses relating to the parcel.
9. The statement of Umakant Thakur was also recorded
during investigation on 09.12.2022 wherein he had stated that the
amount was transferred into his account at the instance of the
present applicant and that his wife Saraswati Thakur was in
contact with the present applicant. Another suspected identity
with the name Sylesster Chinedu Nnaka @ Silvester Chinedu
Udennaka of the applicant was revealed during the investigation.
10. After completion of investigation, complaint was filed and
the matter is pending trial.
11. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the
applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and no
contraband has been recovered from his possession. It is argued
that the entire case of the prosecution is based upon the
disclosure statement of co-accused Saraswati Thakur and the
same is not admissible in evidence in view of the judgment of the
page no. 3 of 10
-- 3 of 10 --
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu,
(2021) 4 SCC 1.
12. It is further argued that the shipper’s copy available on the
seized parcel does not bear the name of the present applicant and
therefore there is no nexus between the applicant and the parcel
in question. It is further argued that the husband of co-accused
Saraswati Thakur namely Umakant Thakur has not been made an
accused in the present case and therefore the prosecution story is
doubtful. It is further argued that there is no independent
evidence such as call detail records, Whatsapp chats or financial
transactions linking the applicant with the alleged offence.
13. It is further argued that the applicant is in custody for a
considerable period and the trial is likely to take long time and
therefore the applicant deserves bail.
14. Learned counsel for the applicant has also placed reliance
upon the following judgments:
a) Nursheid Mansuri vs Narcotics Control Bureau, 2025
SCC OnLine Del 917
b) Rahish Nadiar Ali Shah vs Narcotics Control
Bureau, Bail Appln. No. 1056/2025, decided on 08.07.2025 by
Hon’ble Delhi High Court
page no. 4 of 10
-- 4 of 10 --
15. It is argued that in similar circumstances bail has been
granted and therefore the present applicant is also entitled to bail.
16. Per contra, learned Special Public Prosecutor for NCB has
strongly opposed the bail application and submitted that recovery
in the present case is of commercial quantity, therefore the
rigours of Section 37 NDPS Act are attracted.
17. It is submitted that the present applicant is the main
conspirator who supplied the contraband to co-accused Saraswati
Thakur and instructed her to book the parcel abroad. It is further
submitted that incriminating articles including weighing
machine, parcel related documents and mobile phones were
recovered from the residence of the applicant. It is further
submitted that photographs of the applicant along with co-
accused Saraswati Thakur were found in the mobile phone which
establishes their association. It is further submitted that the
statements of Saddam and Umakant Thakur also connect the
present applicant with the offence and show financial linkage and
coordination between the accused persons.
18. It is further argued that the applicant has failed to satisfy
the twin conditions under Section 37 NDPS Act and therefore the
bail application is liable to be dismissed.
page no. 5 of 10
-- 5 of 10 --
19. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the
learned Special Public Prosecutor for NCB and have perused the
record.
20. In the present case, recovery of commercial quantity of
Methamphetamine has been effected and therefore the rigours of
Section 37 NDPS Act are applicable.
21. Section 37 NDPS Act imposes stringent conditions for
grant of bail in cases involving commercial quantity and bail can
be granted only if the Court is satisfied that there are reasonable
grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty and that he is
not likely to commit any offence while on bail.
22. In the present case, the material collected during
investigation prima facie shows that the contraband was supplied
by the present applicant to co-accused Saraswati Thakur who
booked the parcel abroad on his instructions.
23. Photographs of the applicant along with co-accused
Saraswati Thakur were found in a mobile phone seized during the
investigation which establishes their association and connection.
The statement of independent witness Saddam Hussain shows
that money was transferred to the bank account of Umakant
page no. 6 of 10
-- 6 of 10 --
Thakur at the instance of the present applicant which prima facie
shows financial linkage between the accused persons.
24. The statement of Umakant Thakur also implicates the
present applicant and shows his involvement in the parcel
booking and related activities.
25. The argument that the shipper’s copy does not bear the
name of the applicant does not help the applicant at this stage as
the case of the prosecution is that the parcel was booked through
co-accused Saraswati Thakur on the instructions of the present
applicant and conspiracy is generally proved through
circumstantial evidence.
26. The argument that Umakant Thakur has not been made an
accused also does not help the applicant as the prosecution is not
bound to make every person an accused and the role of each
person is to be determined during trial.
27. At this stage, the material on record prima facie indicates
the involvement of the applicant in the conspiracy relating to
trafficking of narcotic drugs/psychotropic substances and
therefore it cannot be said that there are reasonable grounds for
believing that the applicant is not guilty.
page no. 7 of 10
-- 7 of 10 --
28. Further, considering the nature of allegations and the role
attributed to the applicant in trafficking of narcotic drugs as well
as the accused changing his identity, this Court is also not
satisfied that the applicant is not likely to commit any offence
while on bail.
29. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the
judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Nursheid Mansuri
vs Narcotics Control Bureau, 2025 SCC OnLine Del 917. The
said judgment is distinguishable on facts as in that case the
accused had remained in custody for a long period and the trial
had not commenced and the rigours of Section 37 were relaxed
on account of prolonged incarceration. In the present case, as
observed above, the accused has failed to overcome the strict
condition regarding bail as imposed u/s 37 of the NDPS Act.
Considering the distinct facts, the case law cited can not come to
aid of the applicant.
30. Learned counsel has also relied upon Rahish Nadiar Ali
Shah vs Narcotics Control Bureau, Bail Appln. No. 1056/2025
decided on 08.07.2025. The said judgment is also distinguishable
on facts as in that case the Hon’ble High Court found lack of
sufficient material linking the accused with the contraband and
bail was granted on the basis of parity and lack of evidence. In
page no. 8 of 10
-- 8 of 10 --
the present case, however, there is material including statements
of witnesses, photographs, financial transactions and recovery of
incriminating articles linking the applicant with the offence and
therefore the said judgment does not help the applicant.
31. Considering the recovery of commercial quantity of
contraband, the material collected during investigation, the role
attributed to the applicant and the bar contained under Section 37
NDPS Act, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant has
failed to satisfy the twin conditions of Section 37 NDPS Act.
32. Accordingly, the bail application filed on behalf of the
applicant Nnaka Christian Ilechukwu @ Efe @ Sylvester
Chinedu Nnaka is dismissed.
33. Nothing observed herein shall be construed as an
expression on merits of the case, and the applicant shall be at
liberty to renew his prayer at an appropriate stage in accordance.
34. The coversheet in compliance of the practice directions no.
124/Rules/DHC dated 10.12.2024, containing the directions
passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in “Suhas
Chakma Vs. Union of India & Ors.”, Neutral Citation 2024 INSC
813 is issued separately.
35. Application is disposed of accordingly.
page no. 9 of 10
-- 9 of 10 --
36. Copy of the present order be given dasti and same be also
sent to concerned jail superintendent, to be supplied to the
applicant/accused.
(Jitendra Pratap Singh)
ASJ NDPS Act
(Special Judge)/PHC
NDD/02.04.2026
page no. 10 of 10
-- 10 of 10 --