Interim Order 7

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 31 10/04/2026 SC 214/2016
PS CRIME BRANCH
STATE V/S YOGESH KOLAMBEKAR
06.08.2026
Present: Dr. Raj Rani, Ld. Addl. PP for the State.
Ld.counsel for the applicant/accused.
This is an application for seeking regular bail by the
applicant Yogesh Kolambekar.
It is argued by Ld. Counsel for the applicant that the
applicant was arrested on 24.10.2025 and has remained in JC
continuously since then. It is further argued that the present matter
is at the stage of charge and there are 21 witnesses cited by the
prosecution. It is further argued that the contraband allegedly
recovered ( 1091.5 grams) from the applicant is marginally higher
than the notified commercial quantity of ‘charas’ (1 kg). It is
argued that there are contradictions as far as the alleged recovery
of contraband from the applicant is concerned, whether the same
has been recovered from shoulder bag or car-boot. It is argued that
as per the FIR the contraband was recovered from shoulder bag,
however, in the order U/S 52A NDPS Act it has been mentioned
that the same has been recovered from car-boot. It is further argued
that the witness Neeraj cited by the prosecution is interested
witness,who has allegedly supplied the contraband on the say of
co-accused Aryan Singh, who has been granted bail in the present
case. It is argued that there is also difference in the weight of the
contraband which was seized and the weight of the contraband at
the time of proceedings U/S 52A NDPS Act. It is argued that there
is no previous involvement of the applicant in any other case. It is
further argued that the contradictions and the lapses in the
investigation are grounds of bail to the applicant as the alleged
-- 1 of 3 --
:: 2 ::
recovery from the applicant is doubtful and therefore, the rigours
of Section 37 NDPS Act are diluted. It is therefore, prayed that the
applicant be released on bail.
Ld. Addl. PP for the State has opposed the bail with
the assistance of IO and submitted that the contraband was
recovered from the shoulder bag of the accused and there might be
clerical error order sheet of the proceedings U/S 52A NDPS Act.
It is further submitted that the difference in weight is of minor
nature which might happen due to moisture and even otherwise
both the weights are of commercial quantity. It is further argued
that the search and seizure have been videographed as required
under BNSS. It is further argued that the contraband is of
commercial quantity and Section 37 NDPS Act raises the bar for
not granting bail to the applicant. It is therefore, prayed that the
present application may be dismissed.
Heard. Record perused.
There might be some difference in the weight of the
contraband which was measured at the time of seizure and the
weight at the time of proceedings U/S 52 A NDPS Act, however,
it makes no major difference as the quantity still remains
commercial in nature.
As far as the alleged recovery from the applicant is
concerned, as per FIR the contraband has been recovered from the
shoulder bag of the applicant and there is only one stray order U/S
52A NDPS Act in which it is mentioned that the same is from the
car-boot. The IO has clarified in his supplementary reply that the
description of recovery appears to have been inadvertently typed
incorrectly and it does not reflect the contents of the application
filed by the IO.
-- 2 of 3 --
:: 3 ::
Be that as it may, the aforesaid contradictions or lapses are
to be appreciated after leading of evidence. The bar of Section 37
NDPS Act is still applicable to the present case. This court is of
the view that there is no prima-facie reasonable justification for
overcoming the bar of Section 37 NDPS Act and therefore, the
applicant is not entitled to bail. The present application is hereby
dismissed.
Nothing in this order shall tantamount to an expression of
opinion on the merits of the case during trial.
Pursuant to directions issued by Hon’ble Supreme Court of
India in SMWP (Criminal) No. 4/2021 titled as In Re Policy
Strategy for Grant of Bail as well as in compliance of judgment
titled as Ajay Verma Vs. State, copy of this order be sent to Jail
Superintendent through e-mail.
Copy of this order be given dasti, as prayed for.
(Sushil Anuj Tyagi)
Spl. Judge(NDPS)/ASJ
North Distt., Rohini Courts,
Delhi/06.08.2026(
r)
-- 3 of 3 --