Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010115432025 2025:GAU-AS:7049 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1197/2025 KAJI ALIAS OMAR KAJI ALIAS AMAR KAJI SON OF ABDUL MAZID, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE DATIALBORI (PASCHIM), POLICE STATION- LAHARIGHAT, DISTRICT MORIGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 782126. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED STANDING COUNSEL, NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N J DUTTA, MR A BASUMATARY Advocate for the Respondent : SC, NCB, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 30.05.2025 1. Heard Mr. N.J. Dutta, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M. Deka, the learned counsel for the NCB. 2. This application under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Page No.# 2/4 Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Kaji @Omar Kaji @ Amar Kaji, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Special (NDPS) Case No. 39(N)/2024, under Sections 8(c)/21(c)/27-A/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985, arising out of NCB Crime Case No. 15/2023. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been shown as an absconder in the final complaint filed by the NCB before the Court of the learned Special Judge, Nagaon. 4. He submits that though the Court of the learned Special Judge, Nagaon has issued summons to the present petitioner, fixing 12.06.2025, as the date of appearance, however, he apprehends that as the offence involved commercial quantity of contraband, he may not be granted bail, even if he appears before the Trial Court, in pursuant to the summons received by him. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are no incriminating materials could be collected during the investigation against the petitioner and no notices under Section 67 were served during the course of the investigation only. 6. He submits that the final compliant has been filed by the NCB without the petitioner either being arrested, or his statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, 1985. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner has cited a ruling of the Apex Court in the case of “Aman Preet Singh vs. CBI Through Director” reported in (2021) AIR (SC) 4154, wherein the Apex Court has observed that, if during the entire period of investigation, an accused has Page No.# 3/4 not been arrested or not being produced before the custody, and the investigation has been completed it may be sufficient ground for releasing such an accused on bail. 8. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the NCB has opposed the prayer for bail, as no genuine apprehension of getting arrested is there in this case. 9. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the sides and have perused the materials available on record. 10. Though in the final complaint filed by the NCB before the Trial Court, a prayer was made for issuing non-bailable warrant of arrest against the present petitioner, who has been shown as an absconding accused in the final compliant, however, in spite of that the Trial Court has issued summons to the petitioner fixing, 12.06.2025 for appearance. 11. The Trial Court is under no legal embargo to consider the application of bail of the petitioner on his appearance. The petitioner may plead his case for bail before the Trial Court. His apprehension that the Trial Court on his appearance before it, may not grant bail has no legal basis. 12. This Court is of the considered opinion that as the Trial Court has issued only summons to the petitioner, there is no genuine apprehension of getting arrested in connection with Special (NDPS) Case No. 39(N)/2024. 13. This anticipatory bail application is accordingly dismissed with an Page No.# 4/4 observation that the petitioner may appear before the Trial Court on the date fixed in the summons and may file a regular bail application on his appearance before the said Court, if so advised. 14. This bail application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant