Latest
Tuesday, October 27, 2026
Supreme Court of India
NDPS Act

NDPS Case: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Hotel Owner After Manager's Bail; Nothing Recovered From Him

Published: · NyayVidhan

The Supreme Court granted bail to a hotel owner in jail since 21.12.2023 in a Gujarat NDPS case in which the main accused was found with a commercial quantity of contraband in one of the hotel's rooms. Though his earlier special leave petition had been dismissed, the Court entertained a fresh one after the hotel's manager got bail, and released him as nothing was recovered from him and he had no criminal antecedents (paras 1-3).

NDPS Case: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Hotel Owner After Manager's Bail; Nothing Recovered From Him

Judgment Intelligence

Bail Granted
Mayurdan Pravindan Gadhavi v. State of Gujarat
Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 18596 of 2026
Court
Supreme Court of India
Date of Decision
26 October 2026
Bench
Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Shree Chandrashekhar
Relevant Acts & Sections
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 8(c), 22(c) and 29
Final Outcome

Bail granted on terms fixed by the trial court, with reporting at the police station on the first Monday of every month, 11 AM to 1 PM; the special leave petition is disposed of (paras 3-6).

Source Supreme Court of India, www.sci.gov.in — order dated 26.10.2026

Key holdings

  1. The Court entertained a fresh special leave petition, though the petitioner's earlier one was dismissed, after the hotel's manager was granted bail (para 1).
  2. The petitioner owned the hotel where the main accused was found with a commercial quantity, but nothing was recovered from his possession (para 1).
  3. Custody since 21.12.2023 and no criminal antecedents weighed with the Court (para 2).
  4. Bail terms are left to the trial court, with monthly reporting at the police station (paras 3-4).

Judgment digest by NyayVidhan: a summary of the court's judgment, not its text. The judgment itself is the authoritative version.

Brief Facts

C.R. No. 1121440232944 of 2023 was registered at Police Station Kamrej, District Surat, under Sections 8(c), 22(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act (para 3). The main accused was found in possession of a commercial quantity of contraband in one of the rooms of a hotel owned by the petitioner; admittedly, the contraband was not recovered from the petitioner's possession (para 1). He has been in jail since 21.12.2023 (para 2). His earlier Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8719 of 2025 was dismissed, and on 17.07.2026 the Supreme Court granted bail to a co-accused, the hotel's manager (para 1). This petition challenged the Gujarat High Court's order of 03.09.2026 in CRLMA No. 18317/2026.

Court's Findings

The Court recorded why it entertained this petition although the petitioner's earlier special leave petition had been dismissed: the co-accused had since been enlarged on bail on the ground that he was the manager of the hotel in one of whose rooms the main accused was found with a commercial quantity, the petitioner was the hotel's owner, and admittedly nothing had been recovered from his possession (para 1). It noted that he had been in jail since 21.12.2023 and had no criminal antecedents (para 2). Considering these broad features of the case, the Court was inclined to release him on bail (para 3). The order gives no further reasons and does not discuss Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Legal Principle

A dismissed special leave petition did not stop the Supreme Court from entertaining a fresh bail plea once a co-accused had been granted bail. The absence of any recovery from the petitioner, custody since December 2023 and no criminal antecedents were the broad features that justified bail (paras 1-3).

NyayVidhan's view · Practice note

Why It Matters

The dismissal of an earlier special leave petition did not end this accused's bail effort in the Supreme Court: the hotel manager's later release on bail, with nothing recovered from the owner, led the Court to entertain a fresh petition (para 1). For the owner of premises where a commercial quantity was found, custody since December 2023 and no criminal antecedents completed the broad features on which bail was granted (paras 2-3). The order is brief, does not address Section 37 of the NDPS Act and states no general rule. Compare Anil Kumar Meena, another Supreme Court bail order on parity and antecedents, and State of Kerala v. Rajesh on the NDPS twin conditions for bail.

Editorial comment by the NyayVidhan Editorial Desk. It is not part of the Court's judgment and is not legal advice.

Precedents Relied Upon

  1. Shaileshbhai Bhagvanbhai Mangukiya Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.7855 of 2026
    Relied Upon Discussed at ¶ 1

    Order dated 17.07.2026 enlarging the co-accused hotel manager on bail; his release, with nothing recovered from the petitioner, was why the Court entertained this fresh petition despite the dismissal of his earlier SLP, and one of the broad features on which it granted bail.

NyayVidhan
Court Judgments · 2 min read
Decided: October 26, 2026 Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Shree Chandrashekhar
PDF
Join our WhatsApp Group
✕

Try: POCSO, IBC, Electoral Bond, Article 370, NDPS Act, Bail Conditions, SC Contempt