Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010108122025 2025:GAU-AS:10175 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1706/2025 MUNNES KHAN S/O SURUT JAMAL KHAN R/O VILL- BECHIMARI PAM UTTAR BURIKHAMAR, P.O. BURIKHAMAR P.S. SARTHEBARI DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM PIN-781309 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S RAHMAN, MS L MISHRA,MS. S PHUKAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 05.08.2025 1. Heard Mr. S. Rahman, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Page No.# 2/6 appearing for the State of Assam. 2. This application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita(BNSS), 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Munnes Khan, who has been detained behind the bars since 02.03.2024, in connection with NDPS Case No. 272/2024, under Sections 21(c)/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 pending before the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 5, Kamrup(Metro) at Guwahati. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 03.03.2024, one Bishal Gorshai, SI of Police, had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in- Charge of STF Police Station, inter-alia, alleging that on receipt of information through reliable sources that the accused persons in the FIR, including the present petitioner have kept huge quantity of suspected narcotic drugs in their rented premises at Pragjyotish Nagar under Jalukbari Police Station, a search team was constituted. During such operation, the rented premises of the present petitioner, 34 numbers of soap boxes containing suspected heroin weighing about 414 grams were recovered therefrom. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is not involved in this case as nothing was recovered from his possession and the premises from where the seized contraband was recovered does not belong to him. 5. He has also submitted that the petitioner has been detained behind the bars for last one year and five months. However, till date, Page No.# 3/6 not even a single prosecution witness has been examined. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the main ground which the petitioner is pressing in this case for his bail is that though the notice under Section 50 of BNSS, 2023 was served on him, however, it does not contain any grounds of his arrest and therefore, he submits his Constitutional Rights guaranteed under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India, has been violated in this case. 7. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that though there are incriminating materials against the petitioner on record, however, he fairly submits that in this case, the notice under Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 which was served on the petitioner, at the time of his arrest does not contain any grounds of his arrest. 8. I have considered the submissions made by the leaned counsel for both sides and have gone through the scanned copy of the records of NDPS Case No. 272/2024. 9. It is apparent from record that the notice under Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 which was served on the petitioner on the date of his arrest, i.e. 02.03.2024 does not contain any grounds of his arrest. No basic facts which necessitated the arrest of the petitioner in the aforesaid case have been mentioned therein. 10. It also appears that apart from the Police Station case number as well as penal provisions involved in the case, no other reasons pertaining to the grounds of the arrest of the petitioner were stated in Page No.# 4/6 the said notice and therefore, this Court is of the view that there has been violation of the Constitutional Mandate of communicating the grounds of arrest, in writing to an arrestee at the time of his arrest. 11. In the case of "Vihaan Kumar Vs. State of Haryana And Another" reported in "(2025) 5 SCC 799” the Apex Court has observed that in the event of violation of Fundamental Rights of an arrestee guaranteed under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India of providing grounds of arrest to such an arrestee, in writing, the arrest itself gets vitiated and on that count only such an arrestee will be granted bail. 12. In the instant case also, there has been violation of the Fundamental Rights of the petitioner guaranteed to him under Article 22 (1) of the Constitution of India which, in the considered opinion of this Court, overrides the embargo of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985. 13. For the aforesaid reasons, the petitioner is entitled to get bail in this case. 14. Accordingly, the above-named petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only), with two suitable sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, subject to the following conditions: (i) That the petitioner shall cooperate in the trial of the NDPS Case No. 272/2024, which is pending before the Court of the learned Additional Page No.# 5/6 Sessions Judge No. 5, Kamrup(Metro) at Guwahati. (ii) That the petitioner shall appear before the trial of the NDPS Case No. 272/2024, as and when so required by him for the sake of fair completion of the trial; (iii) That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Trial Court; (iv) That the petitioner shall provide his contact details including photocopies of his Aadhaar Card or Driving License or PAN Card as well as Mobile Number, and other contact details to the Trial Court; (v) That the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 5, Kamrup(Metro) at Guwahati without prior permission of the said Court and when such leave is granted by the said Court the petitioner shall submit her leave address and contact details during such leave before the said Court; and (vi) That the petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. Page No.# 6/6 15. This bail application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant