Mumbai Court Sends Alleged Dawood Associate Mohammad Salim Dola to NCB Custody Till May 8 in Mephedrone Case

May 2, 2026 : A Mumbai court has remanded Mohammad Salim Dola to the custody of the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) till May 8 in connection with a drug trafficking case involving the seizure of a substantial quantity of mephedrone.

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate K. S. Zanwar, while granting custody, noted that the accused had been absconding for a significant period and had failed to cooperate with the investigation. The court emphasized the seriousness of the allegations, his purported involvement in an international narcotics syndicate, and his criminal antecedents, holding that custodial interrogation was necessary for an effective probe.

Dola, who is allegedly linked to fugitive gangster Dawood Ibrahim, was brought to India from Turkey after being detained pursuant to a Red Notice issued through Interpol at India’s request. He was initially produced before a Delhi court, which granted transit remand to the NCB, following which he was transferred to Mumbai and presented before the jurisdictional magistrate.

The case pertains to a 2023 seizure of approximately 20 kg of mephedrone. The prosecution informed the court that earlier investigation had resulted in the arrest of a co-accused, who allegedly revealed that he regularly sourced large quantities of the contraband from Dola.

According to the NCB, Dola used encrypted digital communication platforms to coordinate deliveries of narcotic substances at predetermined locations, while the proceeds of crime were handled through cash transactions. Investigators have also relied on financial records to trace an alleged money trail linked to the accused.

The prosecution further submitted that Dola is connected to multiple criminal cases being investigated by various agencies, including the Mumbai Police Anti-Narcotic Cell and the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, and indicated that other agencies may seek his custody in ongoing probes.

Opposing the remand, defence counsel argued that the agency had not furnished adequate details of the allegations during the stage of transit remand and questioned the necessity of custodial interrogation.

Rejecting these submissions, the court held that the accused must be confronted with documentary evidence, statements of co-accused, and digital material collected during the investigation. It clarified that the remand order is solely for facilitating investigation and does not amount to a determination of guilt. The accused will continue to be presumed innocent unless proven guilty in accordance with law.