Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010082872025 2025:GAU-AS:5761 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1255/2025 HARESWAR BORUAH SON OF LATE KOLAI BARUAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BHOGPUR CHARIALI, NARAYANPUR, LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A K BORAH, MR. H S BORAH Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 09.05.2025 Heard Mr. A. K. Borah, learned counsel of the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State respondent. 2. This application under Section 483 of BNSS, praying for grant of bail to the accused/petitioner, who has been languishing in jail hazot since 21.03.2025 in connection with Narayanpur P. S. Case No. 23/2025, registered under Section 20(b) (ii) B/29 of the NDPS Act. 3. The Case Diary as called for, has already been received and I have perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the accused/petitioner is a 65-year-old ailing person who was arrested on 21.03.2025 and has been in custody since then. He submits that the Investigating Officer got ample opportunity to interrogate the petitioner keeping him in custody. It is further submitted that the recovery in question was not made from the conscious possession of the accused/petitioner. The petitioner is ready and willing to extend full cooperation in the further investigation of the case if granted the privilege of bail, particularly considering his health condition. 5. On the other hand, Mr. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submits that there are sufficient incriminating materials available against the accused/petitioner, and the recovery was indeed made from his conscious Page No.# 3/4 possession. He further submits that the FSL report has not yet been received, and therefore, he raised objection in granting bail to the accused/petitioner at this stage. 6. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for both sides, I have perused the case diary. Thus, without going into the detail merit of the case as well as considering the length of detention already undergone by the accused/petitioner i.e. 50 days, I am of the view that the I.O. got ample opportunity to interrogate the accused/petitioner keeping him in custody and accordingly, further custodial interrogation of the accused/petitioner seems to be not necessary here in this case. 7. Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge (NDPS), Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur, the accused/petitioner, namely, Hareswar Boruah, be enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions: (i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and (iii) that the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Page No.# 4/4 Special Judge (NDPS), Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur, without prior permission. 8. In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant