Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010144612025 2025:GAU-AS:11003 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1547/2025 MANIKANTA PEGU S/O DHARASING PEGU R/O VILL- CHEKAIMAJ GAON, P.S. SILAPATHAR DIST. DHEMAJI, ASSAM , PIN-786110 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM THROUGH THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. U DUTTA, B DUTTA,MR. B. KUMAR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 19.08.2025 1. Heard Mr. B. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parashar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. Page No.# 2/3 2. This is an application by which the petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Silapathar P.S. Case No. 119/2025 registered under Section 61(2)/105/123 of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 27/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985. 3. The FIR dated 27.05.2025 lodged by the inhabitants of the concerned village reveals that the victim along with three others went to the house of the petitioner and consumed drugs in the house of the petitioner. The village people also stated in the FIR that they have noticed the petitioner along with others have been frequently selling drugs in the villages. On receipt of the said FIR, the police registered the case under the aforesaid sections. 4. Mr. B. Dutta appearing for the petitioner submits that the victim along with others came to the house of the petitioner in an intoxicated condition and that one of them died after being there for some time and as such, he submits that the petitioner is no way involved in drug peddling and as such, he may be released on bail. 5. Mr. K. K. Parashar submits on perusal of the case dairy that the victim went to the house of the petitioner where the petitioner supplied him with drugs which he had and after some time foam was seen coming out from his mouth and the victim eventually died. 6. I have heard the counsels and have perused the records. 7. In view of their statements made by the co-accused which although Page No.# 3/3 is a weak piece of evidence but in cases of bail, their statements assumes relevancy and it is seen from their statements that it was the petitioner who had given the drugs to the victim who ultimately on taking the same expired in the house of the petitioner itself. As such, this Court is of the opinion that no pre arrest bail can by granted to the petitioner. 8. The petition is rejected and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant