HC rejects bail plea in 2.9-kg charas trafficking case

08/10/2026

JAMMU, Oct 7: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed a bail application filed by Mohd. Salim Khan in a narcotics trafficking case involving recovery of 2.910 kg of charas, holding that the stringent conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act were attracted.
Justice Shahzad Azeem passed the order on October 5 in Bail Application No. 98/2026, observing that the prosecution had placed prima facie material indicating the petitioner's involvement in procurement and supply of the contraband. The petitioner was represented by Advocate Idrees Saleem Dar, while the Narcotics Control Bureau was represented by Advocate Sumant Sudan, appearing for Deputy Solicitor General of India Vishal Sharma.
According to the prosecution case, the NCB intercepted a passenger bus travelling from Jammu to Gujarat on December 6, 2023, following prior information regarding transportation of a narcotic substance. A passenger, Suthar Minesh Kumar Ghanshaymbhai, was allegedly found carrying three packets of charas weighing 2.910 kg.
The investigation allegedly identified Khan as the source and supplier of the recovered charas. The prosecution relied upon hotel records, CCTV footage, statements of witnesses, customer application forms, call detail records, telecom analysis and other documentary material to establish his alleged connection with the co-accused.
The petitioner argued that he had been implicated primarily on the basis of the statement of a co-accused, which was inadmissible in view of the Supreme Court's judgment in Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu. He also relied on prolonged incarceration and alleged absence of recovery from his possession.
The High Court, however, noted that the co-accused's statement had only furnished the initial information and that the prosecution had subsequently collected independent material, including CCTV footage, hotel records and call detail records. The Court said the material was yet to be formally proved during trial and therefore refrained from making any final observation on its evidentiary value.
Justice Shahzad Azeem further observed that Section 37 of the NDPS Act is mandatory and that the statutory conditions for grant of bail must take precedence over a plea based on prolonged incarceration or likely delay in trial.
Referring to the Supreme Court's judgments in Narcotics Control Bureau v. Kashif, State of Meghalaya v. Lalrintluanga Sailo, Union of India v. Vigin K. Varghese and Narcotics Bureau v. Mohit Agarwal, the Court held that the length of custody, filing of the charge sheet or commencement of trial, by themselves, could not justify bail in a case governed by Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
The Court held that no ground was made out for enlargement of the petitioner on bail and dismissed the petition. It clarified that the observations were confined to the bail proceedings and would not affect the merits of the trial.
The trial court was also directed to endeavour to record the star witnesses at the first instance and proceed with the trial expeditiously.

Photo Gallery

BSE Sensex

NSE Nifty