Veren Rajnikant Shah vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh

Held

The Court held that the applicant is not entitled to bail. The Court reasoned that the NDPS Act is a comprehensive legislation aimed at eradicating the entire ecosystem of drug trafficking, not just physical possession. The applicant is also being prosecuted under Section 29 of the NDPS Act for abetment and criminal conspiracy, which does not require personal handling of a controlled substance. The gravamen of the offence under Section 29 is knowledge, intent, and participation in the larger criminal enterprise. The Court found the prima facie material to be strong, cogent, and establishing a direct and conscious link between the applicant's acts and the ultimate manufacture of narcotic drugs. Drug trafficking and illicit manufacturing are crimes of extraordinary gravity. The Court emphasized that the applicant's knowledge that the articles would be used in manufacturing narcotic drugs is crucial. The prosecution's case is that the applicant knowingly supplied the articles as an active participant in a criminal conspiracy to manufacture, traffic, and distribute narcotic drugs. The Court noted that once a conspiracy is established, every act of each co-conspirator done in furtherance of it is the act of all. This case involves an organized, hierarchical trans-national drug trafficking network, with the applicant being a conscious and willing participant. Given the recovery of a commercial quantity of Mephedrone from co-accused, the Court was not inclined to grant bail. The bail application was dismissed.

Facts

This is a bail application filed by Veren Rajnikant Shah (the applicant) under Section 483 BNSS for a crime registered at the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Bhopal, for offences under the NDPS Act. The applicant has been in detention since August 20, 2025. The applicant claims to have purchased chemicals from J.K. Chemicals and that these chemicals were not controlled substances at the time of purchase. The DRI seized bills related to these transactions. The applicant's company, Radient Pharma, is GST registered. The applicant contends that his memorandum statement was recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, and he cannot be convicted solely on this basis. Initial lab reports did not find Mephedrone, but subsequent reports from NFSU, Gandhinagar, found Mephedrone and the raw material 2-Bromo 4-Methyl Propiophenone to be positive. The applicant argues these reports are unreliable and no material was seized from him. The respondent (State) opposes bail, stating the applicant supplied 400 kg of 2-Bromo 4-Methyl Propiophenone to a co-accused for manufacturing Mephedrone, aware of its intended use, and received an unusually high commission. The applicant allegedly prepared forged documents and diverted the legitimate supply chain. CDR reports show continuous contact with co-accused. 61.20 kg of Mephedrone was recovered from co-accused.

Key Issues

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail in connection with Crime No.33/2025 registered under Sections 8/22(C), 27A, 28, 29, 30, 35, 54 of the NDPS Act, considering his period of detention since August 20, 2025, and the nature of the allegations. Petitioner's Arguments: The applicant argued that the chemicals purchased were not controlled substances as per the notification dated March 26, 2013, and subsequent amendments, and that 2-Bromo 4-Methyle Propiophenone was declared a controlled substance only on March 11, 2026. He contended that his statement under Section 67 of the NDPS Act is insufficient for conviction, initial lab reports did not find Mephedrone, and the subsequent NFSU report is unreliable due to jurisdictional issues. He also stated no material was seized from him and relied on a High Court order in W.P. No. 7332/2025. He also cited his heart ailment and lack of criminal record. Revenue/State's Arguments: The respondent argued that the applicant, as proprietor of Radiant Pharmachem, supplied 400 kg of 2-Bromo 4-Methyl Propiophenone to a co-accused for manufacturing Mephedrone, with knowledge of its illicit use, and received an inflated commission. The applicant allegedly created forged documents and diverted the supply chain. CDR reports indicate continuous contact with co-accused, and a commercial quantity of Mephedrone was recovered.