The Delhi High Court has denied bail to two Nigerian nationals, Stanley Chimeizi Alasonye and Henry Okolie, accused in a heroin trafficking case, citing the grave nature of the offences and their illegal stay in India. Justice Ravinder Dudeja, while pronouncing the judgment on October 27, 2025, held that the petitioners failed to satisfy the strict requirements under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which governs bail in narcotics cases involving commercial quantities.
Background
The case originated from an October 2021 raid in Mohan Garden, Delhi, following a secret tip-off that two foreigners were allegedly selling drugs near a sweet shop. The police claimed to have seized 500 grams of heroin each from the possession of Henry Okolie and another co-accused, while 300 grams were allegedly recovered later from Stanley Alasonye.
Further searches at their residence reportedly led to the discovery of 4 kilograms of chemical powder and equipment suspected to be used for drug manufacturing. During the investigation, authorities also found that both accused had forged passports and were staying in India without valid immigration records.
Court's Observations
The bench noted that even though there were no independent witnesses or videography of the recovery, that alone could not invalidate the case at this stage.
"The evidentiary value of police witnesses will be tested during trial," Justice Dudeja remarked, referring to Supreme Court rulings that give credibility to police officers performing their official duties unless proven otherwise.
The defence had argued that the accused were not given written grounds of arrest as required by Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Section 52 of the NDPS Act, making the arrest illegal. However, the court relied on the Supreme Court’s recent decision in State of Karnataka v. Sri Darshan (2025), which held that
"procedural lapses in furnishing the grounds of arrest, in the absence of any demonstrated prejudice, do not automatically render the custody illegal."
"The petitioners have failed to show that they suffered any prejudice on account of non-supply of grounds of arrest," the judge observed.
On the issue of delay in the trial - as the accused have been in custody for nearly four years - the court acknowledged the concern but said that the seriousness of the offence outweighed the argument for bail. Justice Dudeja wrote,
"While the court must balance individual liberty with societal interest, the objective behind the NDPS Act is to combat drug trafficking - a menace that endangers public health and safety."
Read also:- Supreme Court Allows Centre to Re-examine AGR Demands Against Vodafone Idea; Company Gets Major Relief
FRRO's Submissions
The Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) opposed the bail plea, informing the court that both men had entered India illegally without any immigration records. Their passports did not bear entry or exit stamps, and the accommodation details they provided were found to be fake. The report further stated that the petitioners had used fraudulent visas, originally issued to UK and Australian nationals, to obtain hotel stays.
"The petitioners are flight risks and have attempted to mislead authorities by using false identities," submitted the FRRO counsel, adding that granting bail could jeopardize their availability for trial.
Court's Decision
After examining the submissions and the evidence, Justice Dudeja concluded that the accused did not satisfy the twin conditions required under Section 37 of the NDPS Act - that there are reasonable grounds to believe they are not guilty and that they are unlikely to commit another offence while on bail.
"The narrow parameters for bail under the NDPS Act are not satisfied in the present case," the court held. It also emphasized that releasing the accused would risk them fleeing the country, given their illegal immigration status and forged documentation.
In firm words, the judge remarked,
"The seriousness of the charge, the weight of the evidence, and the statutory scheme all point in one direction. The continued custody is therefore warranted."
The bail petitions of Stanley Chimeizi Alasonye and Henry Okolie were accordingly dismissed, with the court directing that a copy of the order be sent to the jail authorities for communication to the accused.
Case Title: Stanley Chimeizi Alasonye @ Uka Chukwu vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Henry Okolie vs State of NCT Delhi & Anr.
Case Numbers: Bail Application No. 3830/2024 & Bail Application No. 3037/2025
