NDPS case: Mumbai court rejects bail to accused who made allegations against Sameer Wankhede

A special court in Mumbai last week rejected the bail application filed by Zaid Rana, accused under the Narcotics Control and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, who had made allegations of fabrication of evidence against the former Zonal Director of Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) Sameer Wankhede..The NCB’s case was that it had recovered 1.32 grams of LSD blots (commercial quantity) from Rana’s conscious possession with 22 grams of green leafy substance purported to be ganja, one capsule of an unknown psychotropic substance, and one dab of cannabis.Rana claimed in his bail application that Wankhede had registered this case based on fabricated evidence against him as there was animosity between Rana’s parents and Wankhede’s tenant, who were neighbours.Due to this personal enmity, Wankhede got the alleged recovery planted in his house, Rana stated in his plea..Special Judge AA Joglekar noted from the chargesheet that there were telephonic communications between a co-accused and Rana, and in view of the fact that commercial quantity had been recovered from Rana, his complexity in the crime could not be negated.“…the prima-facie material shows for such transaction pertaining to the illicit drug trafficking during the course of investigation. So in the said scenario it is evident that, the applicant/accused cannot be extended with the relief of enlargement on bail,” the order stated..Advocate Ashok Saraogi for Rana raised the following contentions:that at the time of alleged house search, Rana was not present and he was later on called by his father;that the applicant is a youngster and deserves one more opportunity;that chargesheet and commercial analysis report were filed and nothing incriminating could be found against Rana, nor did it indicate any connection with co-accused;that the panch-witnesses in the present case were same as those in Aryan Khan’s drug case, but following the controversy, the witnesses had been changed with a false report..Special Public Prosecutor Advait Sethna sought rejection of bail on the following grounds:that the sleuth of the NCB had recovered the contraband in commercial quantity and the prima facie involvement of Rana is absolutely located;what Rana had stated was a “ploy to completely mislead and prejudice the Court”;that the present allegations against Wankhede came belatedly, after over a period of 7 months from the date of the alleged planting of the contraband..After considering the evidence on record, the special judge concluded that Rana failed to make out a prima facie case for a grant of bail..[Read order]