As per case facts, police, acting on secret information, searched a house and recovered narcotics and related items, leading to arrests. Petitioners were subsequently implicated based on financial transfers and ... call records with the main accused. They sought regular bail. The question arose whether financial transactions and call detail records, in the absence of other substantial evidence, are sufficient to establish involvement in a drug-related crime, particularly "financing" under Section 27A of the NDPS Act. Finally, the court held that mere financial transactions and call records are not enough to connect the accused to the crime. It also clarified that simply purchasing narcotics does not constitute "financing" under the relevant Statute, which implies providing funds to operate or sustain illicit traffic. Consequently, bail was granted as no other material linked the Petitioners to the crime.