Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010124592025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2170/2025 ROKIBUL KHAN SON OF LATE SELAMOT KHAN VILL- SIMLABARI P.O. SIMILABARI P.S. LAKHIPUR DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM PIN-783330 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR. A F N U MOLLAH Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 05.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. A. F. N. U. Mollah, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Das the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This is an application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 by the petitioner, namely, Rokibul Khan, who has been detained behind the bars since 13.01.2025 (for the last 237 days) in connection with Lakhipur P.S. Case No. 8/2025 registered under Section 22 (c)/29 of NDPS Act, 1985. 3. The gist of accusation in that case is that on 12.01.2023, one Dawseng Talifa, S.I. of Police had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Lakhipur Police Station, inter-alia, alleging that on receipt of an information through the reliable source that the present petitioner will be carrying some narcotic drugs in cartoon and would be selling the same at Jaleswar Kadamtola Bramaputra River Ghat, a team of police was constituted and it reached the spot. 4. At the place of occurrence two accused persons including the present petitioner were apprehended and from their possession one cartoon box was recovered which contain 90 strips of Samplex + tablets containing Tramadol 100 bottles of Shivcof-TS Syrup containing codeine phosphate. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been detained behind the bars since for last 237 days and, he is seeking bail in this case mainly on grounds of violation of his fundamental rights under Article 22 (1) of the Constitution of India, in as much as though, the Page No.# 3/5 notice under Section 47 was served on the petitioner, however it did not contain any grounds of arrest or the basic facts which necessitated the arrest of the petitioner in the aforesaid case, the council for the petitioner has relied upon has cited rolling of the apex court in the case of “Vihaan Kumar Vs. The State of Haryana” reported in (2025) 5 SCC 799. 6. He submits that the violation of the mandate of the constitution under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India as well as under Section 47 of the BNSS, 2023 would has rendered the arrest illegal in view of the aforesaid and, therefore, he submits that the petitioner may be allowed to go on bail. 7. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that in the aforesaid case, the Charge Sheet bearing Charge Sheet No. 63/2025 dated 31.05.2025 and has submitted that there are sufficient materials against the petitioner in the record. 8. He also submits that the quantity of contraband in this case is commercial quantity and, therefore, embargo of Section 37 of the BNS, 2023 is applicable in this case, however he fairly submits that in notice served on the petitioner under Section 47 of the BNS, 2023 nothing apart from the police station case number and the penal provision contained involved in the case has been stated there. 9. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the scanned copy of the records of the Lakhipur P.S. Case No. 8/2025. 10. Though, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that Charge Sheet has been laid, however, no order to that effect has been found in the scanned copy of the records. 11. It appears that in this case, notice under Section 47 of BNSS, 2023, Page No.# 4/5 which was served on the petitioner on 14.01.2025, i.e., immediately after his arrest, it contains only police station case number, i.e., Lakhipur P.S. Case No. 8/2025, as well as penal provisions involved in the case, that is, under Section 22(C)/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 no basic facts which necessitated the arrest of the petitioner in this case has been stated in the same notice. 12. Therefore, there is apparent violation of the fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed to him under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India, as well as statutory rights under Section 47 of the BNSS. 13. In view of the observation made by the Apex Court, in case of the Vihaan Kumar Vs. The State of Haryana” (Supra), such violation would render the arrest itself illegal and on that ground, the petitioner is entitled to get bail. 14. Accordingly, the petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Goalpara with the following conditions: i. That the petitioner shall cooperate in the trial of Lakhipur P.S. Case No. 8/2025 which is pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, Goalpara; 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; iv. That the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Page No.# 5/5 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 v. That the petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. 15. With the above observation, this bail application is accordingly, disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant