Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010178452025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2628/2025 JITEN KARMAKAR S/O LT. SANATH KARMAKAR VILL- SOLGOI TEA ESTATE, P.S. BAZARICHERRA DIST. SRIBHUMI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R CHOUDHURY, Z HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date: 25.09.2025 Heard Mr. H. R. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused- applicant. Also heard Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, representing the State respondent. 2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, for release of the Page No.# 2/5 accused-applicant on bail in connection with Special (NDPS) Case No. 15/2025, arising out of Bazaricherra P.S. Case No. 50/23, registered under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c)/25/29 of the NDPS Act 1985, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, Sribhumi. 3. The facts as has been narrated in the application are that, on receipt of an information by OC Bazaricherra P.S. at about 8.50 PM, on 17.02.2023, a white colour Scorpio vehicle bearing Registration No. TR-05-0415 was seized from the courtyard of the accused-applicant suspected to be used in transaction of narcotics. It is stated that the Police recovered and seized 53 nos. of packets, each containing suspected Ganjas from the vehicle, which weighted at 530 Kgs. The police, after the investigation, had filed charge-sheet i.e. Charge-sheet No. 18/2024 on 31.01.2024, which mentioned the accused-applicant as Absconder. Since the accused-applicant was declared an Absconder, the learned Special Judge (NDPS), Karimganj has issued a Non-bailable Warrant of Arrest (NBWA) to the accused-applicant, vide its order dated 04.03.2024. The accused-applicant, thereafter, approached this Court by filing a Criminal Revision Petition registered as Crl. Rev. Pet. No. 178/2024, challenging the aforesaid order of issuance of NBWA against the accused-applicant. This Court, vide the order dated 10.05.2024, directed the accused-applicant to appear before the learned Trial Court on 27.05.2024 and to apply for a regular bail. Accordingly, the accused-applicant appeared before the learned Trial Court and applied for regular bail. The bail application of the accused-applicant was rejected on 27.05.2024 by the learned Sessions Judge, Karimganj. Since 27.05.2024, after passing of the rejection order, the accused-applicant is inside the jail for about 1 year and 4 months. 4. The learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the accused-applicant is nowhere linked with the instant case of seizure of Ganja from the aforesaid Scorpio vehicle. He submits that he is neither the owner nor the driver of the aforesaid Scorpio vehicle, parked in front of his house. He submits that he does not have any knowledge as to who has parked the aforesaid vehicle and he does not have any connection, Page No.# 3/5 whatsoever, with the seized Ganja. He further submits that as per the order of this Court, he had appeared before the learned Trial Court and thereafter, he is inside the jail for more than 1 year and 4 months. He submits that the trial proceeding has started and the statements of 3(three) PWs have already been recorded. Therefore, he submits that this Court may allow the accused-applicant to go on bail. He further submits that he is agreeable to any condition that may be put by this Court if he is allowed to go on bail. 5. Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Addl. P.P. submits that the vehicle was parked right in front of accused-applicant’s house in the courtyard and it cannot be said that he does not have any knowledge of the parking of the vehicle. She submits that since, a huge amount of Ganja has been recovered from the aforesaid vehicle and the trial is at a very initial stage, at this stage, the accused-applicant may not be released on bail. She submits that though certain documents have been seized from the vehicle, all those documents turned out to be fake documents. She submits, on the basis of the charge-sheet filed, that there is strong suspicion that the accused-applicant along with the unknown driver of the seized vehicle were transporting the seized narcotic drugs from Tripura to Assam via Damcherra/Balipipla route. She submits that it is apparent that the accused-applicant is involved in the instant case. 6. This Court has heard the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties and also gone through the materials available in the TCR. 7. It is seen that the bail application of the accused-applicant submitted before the learned Sessions Judge, Karimganj, was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge on 27.05.2024, on the ground that the seized vehicle was parked at the compound of the accused-applicant and a huge quantity of Ganja was seized from the vehicle. 8. This Court has gone through the materials available in the TCR, namely, the sketch-map of place of occurrence (PO) prepared by the Investigating Authority, the statements of the 3(three) PWs recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, Sribhumi. From the sketch-map, it is seen that the place of occurrence is in front of the house of the Page No.# 4/5 accused-applicant. It is also found that there is a road in front of the house of the accused-applicant and a field beside the road. On one side of the house of the accused- applicant, there is a house of a neighbor and on the other side, there is a paddy field. So, from the sketch-map, it is seen that the so called space, wherein, the vehicle was parked, can be accessed by anyone at any point of time. It is also seen that there was a motorable road just opposite to his house. Therefore, it is difficult to ascertain as to how the vehicle had reached the place of occurrence. It is also seen that there was no statement or allegation, affirming that the vehicle belongs to the accused-applicant or he is the driver of the seized vehicle. The documents seized from the vehicle also could not point a finger to the accused-applicant to be the owner of the vehicle or the driver of the vehicle. The vehicle was seized when it was parked there and no one was inside the vehicle at that point of time. 9. The Court has also seen the statements recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, of one Biju Chorai (PW-1) and as per his statement, the road in front of the house of the accused-applicant is a small one and only to be used by the pedestrians. He further stated that he did not see the accused-applicant in the place of occurrence. Ram Lakhan Gorh (PW-2) has stated that he cannot say as to who had parked the vehicle in front of the house of the accused-applicant. The statement of UBC Amal Akura (PW-3), one of the Police personnel who was involved in the seizure, has not stated anything in affirmative as to the involvement of the accused-applicant in the instant case. 10. After going through the materials available on record and hearing the submissions advanced by the learned counsels for the parties, this Court is of the view that the accused-applicant has been charge-sheeted for strong suspicion of his involvement in the case and the same can be ascertained only if the trial is over. However, at this stage, looking at the materials available and the time, the accused-applicant passed in jail, this Court is of the considered view that the accused-applicant can be released on bail with certain stringent conditions. Accordingly, this Court allows the instant bail application of Page No.# 5/5 the accused-applicant for releasing him on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) with a surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Sribhumi, subject to the following condition: - (i) The accused-applicant shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Sessions Judge, Sribhumi, without prior permission. 11. Accordingly, the instant bail application is disposed of as allowed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant