Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010085682025 2025:GAU-AS:7602 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1312/2025 ABDUL HAMID S/O- MAULANA KAMAL UDDIN VILL- RUPARGOOL, PO.- SINGARIA BAZAR, P.S- NILAMBAZAR, DIST-SRIBHUMI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R CHOUDHURY, A S PRODHANI,S. TALUKDAR Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 10-06-2025 Heard learned counsel Mr. H.R. Choudhury for the petitioner Abdul Hamid, who has filed this application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with prayer for bail as he is behind bars since 07.06.2023 in Page No.# 2/4 connection with Special NDPS Case No. 59/2023 arising out of Nilambazar Police Station Case No. 111/2023 under Section 22(C)/25/29 of Narcotic Drugs Psychotropic Substances, 1985, pending in the Court of Sessions Judge, Karimganj. 2. Heard Mr. P.S. Laskar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam. 3. The petitioner has prayed for bail on the ground of parity. It is submitted that the petitioner is arrested along with three other accused, who have already been enlarged on bail. 4. It is submitted that the petitioner has been undergoing prolonged incarceration and only one out of eight witnesses has been examined so far. His right to personal liberty has thus been curtailed. 5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised serious objection stating that the petitioner is booked under a heinous offence of transporting 300 grams of Yaba tablets. It is further submitted that in case of heinous and severe offence, prayer for bail on the ground of parity and on the ground of prolonged incarceration is not tenable. 6. The petitioner has also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Dhirendra Kr. Choudhury Vs. State of Assam wherein vide order dated 14.08.2024 in Crl. Appeal No. 3379/2024, the appellant Dhirendra Kr. Choudhury was granted bail for being incarcerated for 17 (Seventeen) months. 7. I have considered the submissions at the bar with circumspection. I have considered the submissions that the petitioner’s right to personal liberty has Page No.# 3/4 been curtailed due to procrastination of trial by the Court as well as by the State. 8. I have considered the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. It appears that bail may be granted to the petitioner. The petitioner has pledged to cooperate with the trial and to abide by any stringent conditions if imposed upon him. 9. Considering all aspects and in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Dhirendra Kr. Choudhury’s case (supra), petition is allowed. 10. The petitioner is enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac) with two local sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court under the conditions that :- (i) the petitioner shall refrain from such activities with which he is alleged till completion of trial, (ii) the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission and, (iii) the petitioner shall cooperate with the trial. 11. On breach of any of the bail conditions, the Court is at liberty to immediately cancel the bail granted to the petitioner. 12. In terms of the above observation, this Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Page No.# 4/4 Comparing Assistant