Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010175912025 2025:GAU-AS:10377 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/848/2025 GOVIND SAH ALIAS GOVIND SHAH S/O MITHILESH PRASAD SHAH R/O VILL- MATHA, P.S. THANA LADANITY, TEH-MADHUBANI, DIST. MADHUBANI, BIHAR-847232. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA REP BY SC CBI Advocate for the Petitioner : MS B GOGOI, MR J K Bhuyan Advocate for the Respondent : SC, NCB, In Bail Appln. Case No. 1994/2025 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 06.08.2025 1. Heard Mr. J.K. Bhuyan, the learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. M. Deka, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the NCB. 2. This interlocutory application (criminal) has been filed by the Page No.# 2/4 petitioner, namely, Govind Sah @ Govind Shah, in connection with Bail Application No. 1994/2025, inter alia praying for rectification of some typographical errors which has crept in the order dated 01.08.2025 passed in Bail Application No. 1994/2025. 3. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in the aforesaid order dated 01.08.2025, the connected NDPS case number as well as NCB Crime number has been wrongly mentioned. 4. It also appears that the gist of accusation is also of a different case as well as other typographical errors, as stated in the interlocutory application have been crept in. He, therefore, prays for rectification of the said errors as they are due to typographical errors only. 5. On the other hand, Ms. M. Deka, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the NCB has also submitted that the errors indicated by the learned counsel for the petitioner are typographical errors and the same may be rectified. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides. 7. I have also examined the records of Bail Application No. 1994/2025, which was listed as item No. 28 in the cause-list of 01.08.2025. 8. On verification of the records as well as the video footage of the Live Streaming done by the Registry of this Court of the Courts proceeding on 01.08.2025, it appears that on 01.08.2025, the bail Page No.# 3/4 application No. 1994/2025 was listed as Item No. 28, whereas, bail application No. 1926/2025 was listed as Item No. 27. 9. It also appears that in both the cases, the present petitioner, namely, Govind Sah @ Govind Shah, was the petitioner and he was granted bail in both the cases on the ground of prolonged incarceration. 10. The learned counsel for the petitioner while making the submissions before the Court on that day, has submitted that his submission in respect of Item No. 28 would be same as which was in respect of Item No. 27. 11. Same was the submissions of the learned counsel for the NCB. 12. It also appears that this Court also directed that the order of bail in respect of Item Nos. 27 and 28 would also remain same except certain changes. 13. It appears that as it was directed that the order would remain same even the case number and gist of accusation were also typed out same in both the cases, which has resulted in inadvertent error in the order of Item No. 28, i.e. bail application No. 1994/2025. 14. The said errors are required to be rectified as same are inadvertent typographical errors. Accordingly, a corrected bail order dated 01.08.2025 in bail application No. 1994/2025 is typed out and the same is kept in the record of bail application No. 1994/2025. 15. The Registry is directed to upload the corrected order on the Page No.# 4/4 same date and remove the earlier erroneous order dated 01.08.2025 from the website of Gauhati High Court. 16. This interlocutory application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant