Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010160312025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1749/2025 ALAUDDIN AHMED S/O- MAFIZ ALI. R/O- VILL.- HAWLY GHAT. P.S.- MUKALMUA, DIST.- NALBARI, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S ISLAM, S RAHMAN,MR. R ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 28.07.2025 1. Heard Mr. S. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. K. Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Alauddin Ahmed, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Mukalmua P.S. Case No. 161/2025 under Sections 21(b)/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985. Page No.# 2/3 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on the basis of an FIR lodged on 25.06.2025, a search operation was conducted in the house of one Alauddin Ahmed and during search operation suspected brown sugar weighing about 20.27 grams (with containers) was recovered therefrom and the co-accused, who is the wife of the Alauddin Ahmed petitioner was apprehended. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though the seizure of the contraband along with containers weighed about 20.27 grams when the said contraband was produced before the Magistrate and only the suspected heroin was weighed without container it was found to be 1.42 grams only and, therefore, this case ought to have been registered under Section 21(a) of the NDPS Act, 1985 and in which case it becomes bailable. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the wife of the petitioner Ms. Rukia Begum @ Rukiya Begum was also granted bail by this Court by order dated 19.07.2025 in Bail Application No. 2269/2025 wherein an observation has been made that this case ought to have been registered under Section 21(a) of the NDPS Act, 1985. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the police is searching for the petitioner and it might arrest him and therefore, he has approached this Court for seeking protection under Section 482 of BNSS. 7. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that apparently this case ought to have been registered under Section 21(a) of the NDPS Act, 1985 considering the weight of the contraband recovered in this case and in such a case, the application for anticipatory bail is not maintainable. 8. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides. Page No.# 3/3 9. It appears that the contraband seized in this case is only 1.42 grams of suspected heroin which is a small quantity of heroin and, therefore, this case ought to have been registered under Section 21(a) of the NDPS Act, 1985. In such a situation, this application under Section 482 of BNSS would not be maintainable. 10. However, it is hereby made clear that considering the facts of this case, mere registration of a case under wrong provision of law would not take away the right to which the petitioner is otherwise entitled to. 11. This case ought to have been registered under Section 21(a) of the NDPS Act, 1985 which makes it bailable and in such a case the petitioner has a right to get bail in the event of his arrest. 12. With the above observation, this anticipatory bail application is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant