The North Goa Special NDPS Court has discharged Moidin Amshin and Mohammed Suhel, who were accused in an MDMA seizure, holding that mere presence as co‑passengers in a vehicle carrying contraband does not amount to conscious possession or conspiracy.

According to the prosecution, the Crime Branch received reliable intelligence that the main accused, Sajeer Ali, was travelling from Karnataka in a white car to deliver narcotics to prospective clients in Goa on May 16, 2025.

Acting on the tip‑off, police intercepted the car in the parking lot near the Goa State Central Library in Patto, Panaji, and seized a commercial quantity of 91.934 grams of MDMA. At the time of the interception, Sajeer Ali was driving and Moidin Amshin and Mohammed Suhel were passengers.
The defence argued that the two—who are cousins—had worked at a restaurant in St. Inez, Panaji. They had earlier paid Rs. 60,000 to rent a flat in Goa; when that arrangement fell through, they returned to their hometown in Karnataka.

The defence submitted that they had accepted a ride from Sajeer Ali solely to return to Goa to pursue legal action and recover their money.

The prosecution opposed the discharge applications, contending that a detailed appreciation of defence evidence is impermissible at the stage of framing charges. Relying on statutory presumptions under the NDPS Act and Supreme Court precedents, it argued that inter‑state travel together at the same time and place as a scheduled drug delivery constituted sufficient circumstantial evidence to frame charges of criminal conspiracy.

Rejecting the prosecution’s submission, the court noted that, although statutory presumptions exist under the NDPS Act, the prosecution must first establish foundational facts linking an accused to the contraband.

The court observed that the contraband was found on the driver, not in common areas of the car, and there was no evidence that either co‑accused knew of the hidden narcotics or had entered into a prior conspiracy.

Finding that the material on record did not generate the "grave suspicion" required to proceed to trial, the court discharged both Mohammed Suhel and Moidin Amshin.