FIROZ AKBAR ABDUL RAHIM KHAN vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA — BA/2668/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 08th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM010352412025
Filing Number
BA/13432/2025
Filing Date
02-07-2025
Registration No
BA/2668/2025
Registration Date
02-07-2025
Judge
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R. M. JOSHI
Coram
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R. M. JOSHI
Bench Type
Single
Category
BAIL ( 51 )
Sub-Category
Regular ( 1 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal
Decision Date
08th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Allowed
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
FIROZ AKBAR ABDUL RAHIM KHAN
Adv. Taraq Sayed
Respondent(s)
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R. M. JOSHI
FRESH ADMISSION (BAIL APPLICATIONS)
FOR ADMISSION (BAIL APPLICATIONS)
FOR ADMISSION (BAIL APPLICATIONS)
FOR ADMISSION (BAIL APPLICATIONS)
FOR ADMISSION (BAIL APPLICATIONS)
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 09-07-2025 | FRESH ADMISSION (BAIL APPLICATIONS) |
| 08-05-2026 | FOR ADMISSION (BAIL APPLICATIONS) |
| 30-04-2026 | FOR ADMISSION (BAIL APPLICATIONS) |
| 25-03-2026 | FOR ADMISSION (BAIL APPLICATIONS) |
| 24-03-2026 | FOR ADMISSION (BAIL APPLICATIONS) |
Orders
Case Summary: BA/2668/2025 The Bombay High Court granted bail to Firoz Akbar Abdul Rahim Khan, accused of NDPS violations for possessing 53 grams of Mephedrone, finding non-compliance with mandatory Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act. The court held that proper written documentation of advance intelligence and proper Section 50 search procedures were not followed, rendering the seizure potentially negatable at trial. Given the applicant's clean criminal record and low flight risk, bail was granted on Rs.30,000 personal recognizance with monthly police reporting and court attendance conditions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: BA/2668/2025 The Bombay High Court granted bail to Firoz Akbar Abdul Rahim Khan, accused of NDPS violations for possessing 53 grams of Mephedrone, finding non-compliance with mandatory Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act. The court held that proper written documentation of advance intelligence and proper Section 50 search procedures were not followed, rendering the seizure potentially negatable at trial. Given the applicant's clean criminal record and low flight risk, bail was granted on Rs.30,000 personal recognizance with monthly police reporting and court attendance conditions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts