Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010096002025 2025:GAU-AS:6040 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1455/2025 RAMJAN ALI S/O IDRISH ALI R/O DHUPGURI P.S. GOBARDHANA DIST. BAKSA, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. SURAJIT DAS, A S CHOUDHURY,MR A W AMAN,MD A RAHMAN,MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 15.05.2025 Heard Mr. S. Das, learned counsel of the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M. P. Goswami, 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 in connection with Gobardhana P. S. Case No. 26/2025, registered under Sections 21(b) of 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. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the accused/petitioner is innocent and he is no way connected to the alleged offence. He was arrested in connection with this case on 23.03.2025, and since then, he has been in custody. Therefore, the IO got sufficient time to interrogate the petitioner. Considering the length of his detention, he may be released on bail. Furthermore, being a permanent resident of the addressed locality, he will appear before the IO and is ready and willing to cooperate with the further investigation of the case if granted the privilege of bail. 5. On the other hand, Mr. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submits that there is sufficient incriminating material available against the accused/petitioner. Furthermore, he submits that the IO has not yet collected the FSL report. 6. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for both sides, I have perused the case diary which reveals that there are some incriminating materials available against the accused/petitioner. But, without going into the detail merit of the case as well as considering the length of detention already undergone by the Page No.# 3/3 accused/petitioner i.e. 53 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, Baksa, the accused/petitioner, namely, Ramjan Ali, 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 Special Judge, Baksa, without prior permission. 8. In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant