Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010154302025 2025:GAU-AS:10798 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2296/2025 BIKI ALI S/O- ABDUL JANIB. R/O- STADIUM ROAD EAST, MARIANI, P.S.- MARIANI, DIST.- JORHAT, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P J DAS, MR M CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 13.08.2025 Heard Mr. M. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Sharma, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for grant of bail in connection with Mariani P.S Case No. Page No.# 2/3 51/2025 under Section 21(a), 22(C), 27, 27(a) and 29 of the NDPS Act. The FIR dated 16.04.2025 reveals that on a source information from the local people, the police personnel by constituting a team arrived at the residence of the co-accused namely, Shri Sankar Saikia and during the search, contrabands were recovered. However, in respect of the present petitioner, the statement made by the informant is that during the search of the house of Sankar Saikia, both Sankar Saikia and his wife fled from the residence and that the petitioner helped then in fleeing as well as the petitioner helps them in carrying out the NDPS trade. Mr. M. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the said FIR, apart from the said allegation, there is no other allegation against the petitioner and nothing much less any contraband substance was recovered from the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner in fact helped the other co-accused in travelling to the house of the in-laws of the co-accused. Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor submits that it is clearly written in the FIR that the petitioner used to help the co-accused persons in dealing with the business involving NDPS items. Heard both the counsels for the parties. It is seen from the FIR that the present petitioner is alleged to have helped the other co-accused in their business of NDPS trade. No other allegation has been made against him. Further, some of Page No.# 3/3 the items that were seized from the co-accused were prima facie seems to be anti- drugs tablets which are prescribed by the Doctors. Since the petitioner is charged only for an offence under Section 27A of the NDPS, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two (2) local sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court under the following conditions:- (1) He shall cooperate with the investigation and appear before the Court as and when he is required. (2) He shall not tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses whoever is connected with the case. (3) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Trial Court without the permission of the said Court. Petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant