-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 41 OF 2009 IN CRI. APPEAL NO. 266 OF 2008 Gul Nawaz Khan .. Applicant/Appellant. (Org.Accused no.1) V/s. 1. A.B.Kodnani, Intelligence Officer, .. Respondents. NCB, Mumbai and another. --- Mr. Sherali S. Khan for the Applicant/ Appellant. Mr.H.V.Mehta for Respondent No.1. Mr. A.S.Shitole, APP for the Respondent No.2- State. --- CORAM : R. V. MORE, J. CORAM : R. V. MORE, J. CORAM : R. V. MORE, J. DATED : 29th JANUARY, 2009. DATED : 29th JANUARY, 2009. DATED : 29th JANUARY, 2009. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . Heard Mr. Khan, learned counsel for the applicant/ appellant, original accused no.1; Mr. Mehta, learned counsel for respondent no.1 and Shitole, APP for the respondent no.2-State. 2. This application is for grant of bail to the applicant during pendency of final disposal of the criminal appeal no. 266/2008. The Appeal is already admitted on 17.06.2008. -: 2 :- 3. The applicant, accused no.1, is convicted for the offence punishable under section 21 (b) read with sections 8(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act for possession of contraband (heroin) weighing about 78 grams, which is above the small quantity but below the commercial quantity and sentenced to suffer R.I. for five years and to pay fine of Rs. 50,000/- in default to undergo further R.I. for two years. 4. The applicant is in jail for the last 33 months. The learned counsel for the applicant, therefore, submitted that in view of the order of the apex court in the case of Mansigh vs. Union of India (2006) 1 Supreme Mansigh vs. Union of India (2006) 1 Supreme Mansigh vs. Union of India (2006) 1 Supreme Court Cases (Cri.) 279, Court Cases (Cri.) 279, Court Cases (Cri.) 279, the applicant deserves to be released on bail. He further submitted that this court under the similar circumstances granted bail to the accused convicted under the NDPS Act. 5. Mr. Mehta, the learned counsel for the respondent no.1 however submitted that since inception the applicant is in jail as he was not granted bail during pendency of the trial. He further submitted that instead of granting bail to the accused no.1, the appeal can be heard expeditiously. -: 3 :- 6. The appeal is of year 2008. The record and proceedings alongwith the paper book is not yet received. The appeal is not likely to be listed for final hearing in near future. The applicant has already undergone more than half of the period of sentence hence by following the order passed by the Apex Court in Mansingh’s case (supra), I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant during the pendency of the final disposal of the appeal. 7. During the pendency and final disposal of criminal appeal no. 266/2008 the substantive sentence imposed on the applicant, accused no.1 by the special court under the NDPS Act is suspended, upon the applicant’s executing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one or two surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Registrar of the Sessions Court at Bombay and subject to the following conditions : i. The applicant shall deposit the fine before execution of the bail bond, if same is not deposited earlier. ii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activities. iii. The applicant shall remain present at the -: 4 :- time of final hearing of the criminal appeal. iv. The applicant shall report NCB, Mumbai once in a first week of every month. 8. Civil application is disposed of on the above terms. (R.V.MORE,J.)