Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010122912025 2025:GAU-AS:10374 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1886/2025 SORIF ISLAM SO LT NUR KALAM MIAH, RO VILL BEPARIPARA, PS MANKACHAR, DISTRICT SOUTH SALMARA, ASSAM, PIN- 783131 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. SANU HUSSAIN, MS P BARMAN,MR K THAKUR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 06.08.2025 1. Heard Mr. S. Hussain, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Das, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State of Assam. 2. This application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Page No.# 2/6 Suraksha Sanhita(BNSS), 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Sorif Islam, who has been detained behind the bars since 14.07.2024, in connection with Special (NDPS) Case No. 04/2024, under Section 22(c) of the NDPS Act, 1985. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 13.07.2024, one I.A. Talukdar, SI of Police had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Chapar Police Station, inter alia, alleging that an information was received through reliable sources that one Truck bearing Registration No. AS01RC8425 would be carrying huge quantity of narcotic drugs. 4. On receipt of the said information, a search team was constituted, and a naka checking was arranged. During naka checking, the aforesaid truck was intercepted, and petitioner Sorif Islam, was arrested therefrom. 5. During search of the said truck, total 243 numbers of Phensedyl Cough syrup containing codeine were recovered therefrom. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is seeking bail in this case mainly on the ground of violation of his fundamental rights guaranteed to him under Article 22 (1) of the Constitution of India. 7. He submits that, at the time of his arrest, though notice under Section 47 of the BNSS, 2023 was served on him, however it does not contain any grounds of arrest therein. No basic facts which necessitated his arrest has been mentioned therein. Page No.# 3/6 8. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has fairly submitted that, that though notice under Section 47 was served on the petitioner, it does not contain the basic facts and the accusation and the grounds for which the petitioner has been arrested. 9. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides. The Apex Court in the case of “Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana And Another” reported in “2025, 5 SCC 799” has observed as follows:- “26. Therefore, we conclude: 26.1. The requirement of informing a person arrested of grounds of arrest is a mandatory requirement of Article 22(1); 26.2. The information of the grounds of arrest must be provided to the arrested person in such a manner that sufficient knowledge of the basic facts constituting the grounds is imparted and communicated to the arrested person effectively in the language which he understands. The mode and method of communication must be such that the object of the constitutional safeguard is achieved; 26.3. When arrested accused alleges non-compliance with the requirements of Article 22(1), the burden will always be on the investigating officer/agency to prove compliance with the requirements of Article 22(1); Page No.# 4/6 26.4. Non-compliance with Article 22(1) will be a violation of the fundamental rights of the accused guaranteed by the said Article. Moreover, it will amount to a violation of the right to personal liberty guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution. Therefore, non-compliance with the requirements of Article 22(1) vitiates the arrest of the accused. Hence, further orders passed by a criminal court of remand are also vitiated. Needless to add that it will not vitiate the investigation, charge-sheet and trial. But, at the same time, filing of charge-sheet will not validate a breach of constitutional mandate under Article 22(1); 26.5. When an arrested person is produced before a Judicial Magistrate for remand, it is the duty of the Magistrate to ascertain whether compliance with Article 22(1) and other mandatory safeguards has been made; and 26.6. When a violation of Article 22(1) is established, it is the duty of the court to forthwith order the release of the accused. That will be a ground to grant bail even if statutory restrictions on the grant of bail exist. The statutory restrictions do not affect the power of the court to grant bail when the violation of Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution is established.” Page No.# 5/6 10. It appears from the above that in the event of violation of fundamental rights of the person guaranteed to him, under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India, the arrest of such a person itself becomes illegal, and on that count, he is entitled to the get bail. 11. In the instant case also, as the notice which was served on the petitioner at the time of his arrest, only mentions the police station case number in which he was arrested and the penal provision involved in the case, it is devoid of basic facts which necessitated his arrest, and as such, the fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed to him under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India has been violated and on that count, the petitioner is entitled to get bail. 12. In view of the above, the above-mentioned petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs. 50,000/- with a surety of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the Trial Court with following conditions:- (i) That the petitioner shall cooperate in the trial of Special (NDPS) Case No. 04/2024; (ii) That the petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court as and when so required by the Trial Court; (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 in the trial pending against the present petitioner; Page No.# 6/6 (iv) That the petitioner shall provide his contact details including photocopies of his Aadhaar Card or Driving License or PAN card, mobile number, and other contact details before the Trial Court; (v) That the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission of the Trial Court and when such leave is granted by the Trial Court, the petitioner shall submit his leave address and contact details during such leave before the Trial Court; and (vi) That the petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. (vii) With the above observation, this bail application is accordingly, disposed of. 13. This bail application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant