Ms. Sejal Prashant Ambatkar vs. The Superintendent Of Customs (Preventive)A
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Ms. Sejal Prashant Ambatkar, accused No. 2, filed a Criminal Petition seeking bail. She was apprehended on 15.04.2026 upon arriving from Bangkok by Thai Airlines. The Air Intelligence Unit (AIU) of Customs suspected her of carrying contraband. During a search, 2950.000 grams of a substance, suspected to be Ganja/Marijuana, was seized from her checked-in trolley bag. A case was registered against her under Sections 20, 23, and 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985. The petitioner has been in custody since 17.04.2026. The Superintendent of Customs (Preventive), Hyderabad Customs Commissionerate, is the respondent.
Held
The Court granted bail to the petitioner. The reasoning was based on several factors: the petitioner's incarceration since 17.04.2026, the seized contraband being 2950.000 grams of suspected Ganja/Marijuana (an intermediate quantity), and the completion of the material part of the investigation. The Court found it appropriate to grant bail considering the facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the stage of investigation, and the duration of incarceration. The bail was granted subject to the petitioner executing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties, appearing before the respondent authority every Wednesday for eight weeks or until the filing of the charge sheet, and abiding by the conditions stipulated in Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C. (now Section 480(3) of BNSS).
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under the NDPS Act, 1985, considering the quantity of the seized contraband and the stage of investigation? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that she is innocent and falsely implicated. She has been in custody since 17.04.2026. The seized contraband, 2950.000 grams of suspected Ganja/Marijuana, constitutes an intermediate quantity. Furthermore, the material part of the investigation has already been completed. Therefore, bail should be granted. Respondent's Arguments: The respondent opposed the bail application, stating that the alleged offences are under the NDPS Act, making the petitioner ineligible for bail. While acknowledging the seized contraband quantity as intermediate, the respondent contended that the investigation is not yet complete. Consequently, the petition should be dismissed.
Sections Cited
Section 20, Section 23, Section 29, Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail, who is arrayed as accused No.2 in HQPOR No.07/2026-CUS (PREV) on the file of the learned III Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XXV Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, R.R. District, at Rajendranagar, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20, 23 and 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985. 2
The brief facts of the case are that APIS profiling AIU team has suspected the petitioner herein travelling from Bangkok to Hyderabad by Thai Airlines flight on 15.04.2026, to be carrying some contraband. The officers of Air Intelligence Unit (AIU), Customs, Rajiv Gandhi International Airport (RGIA) in the presence of independent witnesses carried out the seizure of a total 2950.000 grams of substance, suspected to be Ganja/Marijuana, a narcotic substance specified under the NDPS Act which was concealed in 10 food packets kept with the clothes in navy blue coloured checked-in trolley bag (Tag number - TG 295562) and the same was seized and a case was registered against her for the above said offences.
Heard Sri Mohammed Ghouse Pasha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior standing counsel for CBIC appearing for the respondent.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent of the said allegations and she is falsely implicated in this case and she is arrayed as accused No.2 and she is in jail since 17.04.2026 and the seized
3
contraband is 2950.000 grams of substance, suspected to be Ganja/Marijuana, which is an intermediate quantity and the material part of the investigation was already completed. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition.
On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner stating that the alleged offences are of the NDPS Act, as such, she is not entitled for the bail. However, he submitted that though the seized contraband is only 2950.000 grams of substance, suspected to be Ganja/Marijuana, which was brought by the petitioner from Bangkok to Hyderabad. Further, the investigation is not yet completed. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.
In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and upon perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the petitioner herein is in jail from 17.04.2026 and the seized contraband 2950.000 grams of substance, suspected to be Ganja/Marijuana,
4
which is an intermediate quantity and the material part of the investigation was already completed. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations, the stage of investigation, the duration of incarceration and the seized contraband, this Court finds it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: i. The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned XXV Additional Judicial Magistrate, at Rajendranagar, Cyberabad, R.R. District. ii. The petitioner shall appear before the respondent authority at 11:00 a.m., on every Wedne ay for a period of eight (8) weeks or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier, for the purpose of investigation, and thereafter, as and when required.
5
iii. The petitioner shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C. (presently, Section 480(3) of the BNSS).
Accordingly, the Criminal petition is allowed.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. _______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 06.05.2026 TU
6
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.7186 of 2026
Date:06.05.2026 TU
Reproduced from the public record of the Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.