Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 18640 (GAU)

JOBED ALI v. THE UNION OF INDIA

Bail Appln./2887/2025 · 2025-09-24

Mridul Kumar Kalita

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010197552025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2887/2025 JOBED ALI SON OF JAHERUL HAQUE R/O VPO SHAKARUR KUTHI, P.S. SAHEBGANJ, DIST. COOCH BIHAR, WEST BENGAL-736168 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE STANDING COUNSEL, NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU (NCB). Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M BISWAS, A GHOSAL,J SINGPHO Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, SC, NCB,MS. M DEKA BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 25.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. M. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M. Deka, learned Standing Counsel for the NCB. 2. This application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner namely Jobed Ali who has been detained behind the bars since Page No.# 2/4 29.01.2024 (for more than one year and seven months) in connection with NDPS case No.183/2024 corresponding to NCB Crime No. 19/2023 under Sections 21(c) & 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 presently pending before the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 5, Kamrup (M). 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 27.11.2023, the Intelligence Officer of NCB received an information through reliable sources that two persons (present petitioners) are likely to arrive at Guwahati railway station at about 6.30 a.m. Accordingly, the NCB officials reached the Guwahati railway station and conducted the search of the train in which the petitioners were travelling. During search operation, about 9.669 kgs of contraband suspected to be methamphetamine tablets were recovered from their possession. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was shown arrested in connection with the NCB Crime No. 19/2023 on 29.01.2024 and the time of showing his arrest, no notice under Section 50 of the CrPC was served on him and therefore there is a clear violation of the Constitutional mandate of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India. 5. The learned counsel of the petitioner further submits that in the meanwhile one of the co-accused has already been granted bail by the trial court by order dated 10.07.2025 passed in NDPS Case No. 183/2024. 6. On the other hand learned Standing Counsel for the NCB has submitted that in this case the petitioner was shown arrested in the NCB Crime Case No. 19/2023 when he was already detained behind the bars and he was fully aware as to why he has been shown arrested in the said case. Hence, non-furnishing of notice to the petitioner under Section 50 CrPC is not fatal the case and may not entitled the petitioner to get bail on that ground. Page No.# 3/4 7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the both sides and have gone through the records available before this court including the scanned copy of the trial court records. 8. It appears from the notice under Section 50 CrPC was not served to the petitioner when he was shown arrested in connection with NCB Crime No. 19/2023 though he was shown arrested in the said case he was not communicated the grounds of arrest which is a mandatory constitutional requirement under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India any breach of the said fundamental rights of the petitioner entitles to him to get bail on that ground. Moreover it appears that the petitioner has been languishing behind the bars for more than one year seven months and not even a single prosecution witness has been examine till date. 9. This Court is of considered opinion that under the facts and circumstances of this case, incarceration undergone by the petitioner in this aforesaid case may be regarded as long incarceration which has infringed the fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed to him under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and as such same overrides the embargo of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985 in this case. 10. For the reasons discussed herein above, this court is of considered opinion that the petitioner is entitled to get bail in the aforesaid case. 11. Accordingly, he is allowed to go on bail of Rs. 1 lakh with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of the Trial Court with following conditions of :- i. That the petitioner shall co-operate in the trial of NDPS Case No. 183/2024, which is pending in the Court of the learned Additional Page No.# 4/4 Sessions Judge No. 5, Kamrup (M); ii. That the petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court as and when so required by the Trial Court; iii. That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Trial Court; iv. That the petitioner shall provide his contact details including photocopies of his Aadhar Card or Driving License or PAN card as well as mobile number and other contact details before the Trial Court; v. That the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission of the Trial Court and when such leave is granted by the Trial Court, the petitioner shall submit his leave address and contact details during such leave before the Trial Court; and vi. That the petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. 12. This bail application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant