Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010097762023 2025:GAU-AS:4995 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1638/2023 APU RANJAN DAS S/O SUBODH CH. DAS R/O KALAM CHOWRA SONAMURA, DIST. SEPAHIJALA TRIPURA. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A CHAUDHURY, MR. D BORA,MR. N MAHAJAN,MR. P K DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 25.04.2025 1. Heard learned Counsel Mr. A.Chaudhary for the petitioner Apu Ranjan Das who has filed this application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 with prayer for pre-arrest bail as he as he is apprehending arrest in connection with Special (NDPS) Case No. 153/2022 arising out of Bazarichera PS Case No. 187/2022 Page No.# 2/3 under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/25/29 of the NDPS Case. 2. Learned Addl.Public Prosecutor Mr. R.J.Baruah is present for the respondent State. 3. The FIR unfolds that during routine naka checking, at 03:40 pm, on 17.10.2022, a red coloured 12-wheeler goods carrier truck bearing Registration No. NL-01Q-5050, loaded with gunny bags was approaching from Tripura side and was signaled to stop. On suspicion, some gunny bags were unloaded and ganja was found under the gunny bags. 93 packets were weighed and a total of 3243 kgs of ganja was found in the truck which was thereafter seized from the Driver Manik Singha and he was taken into custody. 4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is a businessman by profession and he has no criminal antecedent. It is submitted that the alleged contraband was not recovered from his conscious possession. It is submitted as the investigating agency has implicated him, he is apprehending arrest and as such, he may be released on pre-arrest bail. 7. Learned Addl.Public Prosecutor has raised serious objection stating that the offence is of grave nature and the seized contraband Ganja are of commercial quantity and as such, pre-arrest bail may not be considered. 8. I have considered the submissions at the Bar with circumspection. 9. I have also scrutinized the trial court records and the scanned copy of the Case Dairy. 10. There are sufficient incriminating materials in the Case Diary against the petitioner. It appears that trial may be adversely affected if the petitioner is Page No.# 3/3 insulated by an order of anticipatory bail. 11. Considering the gravity of the offence, the petitioner is not entitled to anticipatory bail. At this juncture, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected. JUDGE Comparing Assistant