IQBAL MOHAMMAD MEMON Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this Criminal revision, the applicant has impugned the order dated 7-11-1994 passed by the Additional Sessions judge, Bombay and Special Judge (Narcotics) For greater Bombay, rejecting his application for discharge wider section 227 of the Criminal procedure Code in a case under section 8 (c) read with sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 hereinafter referred to as the NDPS Act. .

(2.) A short reference to the factual matrix from which this Criminal Revision arises is necessary for its disposal. On 2-9-1993, on receipt of a reliable information, an abandoned jeep was found in the parking lot in front of Jewel of India Hotel, worli, Bombay. When searched, it was found to contain 150 kgs. of mandrax tablets which were seized under a panchanama. An offence under sections 8 (c) read with 21, 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 was registered with the Narcotic Cell, CB, cid, Bombay, vide C. R. No. 38/1993. Investigation revealed involvement of a number of persons and pursuant to it, more mandrax tablets and methaqualene powder came to be recovered at the instance of various accused persons. The entire haul was 2027. 750 kgs. of mandrax tablets and methaqualene powder, valued at Rs. 2,02,77,500/-in the international market. According to prosecution, in C. R. No. 38/1993 in all 14 persons are involved. Despite the best efforts of the prosecution, the applicant could not be arrested as he was in dubai since 1985-1986. On 30-11-1993, the charge sheet was submitted under section 8 (c) read with sections 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act against eight persons and in the same, six persons including the applicant were shown as absconding. On the basis of the charge sheet, Special Case no. 170/1993 was registered in the Court of the additional Sessions Judge, Bombay and Special judge, Narcotics for Greater Bombay.

(3.) ON 12-1-1994, pursuant to an application made by the investigating agency, the Special judge, Greater Bombay issued a non-bailable warrant of arrest against the applicant but the same could not be executed as he was absconding. The teamed Judge also issued a proclamation against the applicant.