Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010201552025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2929/2025 LALCHHANHIMA SAILO SON OF LALTHANNGURA SAILO RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 166, KULIKAWN P.S. KULIKAWN, DIST. AIZAWL, MIZORAM, PIN- 796005. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B K MAHAJAN, MR. D BORA,MR. N MAHAJAN,MR. P K DAS,MR. A CHAUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 09.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. B. K. Mahajan, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that though the case diary was called for, however, in the meanwhile, the charge sheet No. 116/2025 dated 31.08.2025 has been laid. 3. The learned counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that this is for Page No.# 2/2 the second time the petitioner has approached seeking bail in this case. 4. On the first occasion, the petitioner did not raise the plea of violation of his fundamental rights, guaranteed to him under Article 22 (1) of the Constitution of India, as well as statutory rights guaranteed under Section 48 of the BNSS, 2023. 5. He submits that the notice to the family members of the petitioners was not sent as soon as possible after the arrest of the petitioner, as required, rather it was sent on 17th, i.e., after his production, before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the plea of violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India may be raised at any point of time. He also submits that the police station to which the WT message was sent by the police, which arrested the petitioner in this case, had issued a certificate that till 29.07.2025, the said WT message was not received by the said police station. 7. This Court is of the considered opinion that since the charge sheet has been laid, it is the Trial Court, which is the best court to consider the prayer for bail at the first instance, after laying of the charge sheet. 8. The pleas taken by the petitioner before this Court may be taken by the petitioner before the Trial Court also. 9. Hence, this bail application is disposed of with an observation that the petitioner may approach the Trial Court and may pray for regular bail before the said Court, if so advised. JUDGE Comparing Assistant