Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010205122025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2979/2025 PRAMOD KUMAR MATHUR S/O LATE HEERALAL MATHUR R/O VILL- GOPINATH MANDIR, KAI PASS, WARD NO. 18, P.S. UDAIPURWATI, DIST. JHUNJUN, RAJASHTHAN. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. S K NARGIS, MS N SULTANA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER 26.09.2025 26.09.2025 1. Heard Ms. S. K. Nargis, learned counsel appearing for the accused petitioner as well as Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing for the State respondent. 2. This petition under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the Page No.# 2/3 accused-petitioner, namely, Pramod Kumar Mathur, praying for grant of bail in connection with NDPS Case No.65/2024 arising out of GRPS Case No. 194/2023 under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c) of NDPS Act pending before the court of learned Sessions Judge, Kamrup(M), Guwahati. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised a preliminary contention that notice under Section 50 Cr.P.C. is inadequate and notice under Section 50A Cr.P.C. was not given. 4. Perused the copy annexed with the bail petition. 5. On query of this Court, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has fairly submitted after perusing the notice under Section 50 Cr.P.C. it is same as that annexed and notice under Section 50A is not available. 6. Copy of the notice under Section 50 Cr.P.C. with regard to the present accused has been annexed and on perusing the same, it appears that prima facie it does not comply with the stipulation of such notices laid down in Vihaan Kumar vs State of Haryana reported in (2025) 5 SCC 799. 7. It has been laid down in Vihaan Kumar (supra) that non compliance of this mandatory procedural provision would be violative of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India and makes the arrest illegal and further detention untenable. It is also held that right to bail in such a situation would prevail over any statutory restrictions. 8. In the given facts and circumstances, I am of the considered view that the accused person herein should be granted bail. 9. Accordingly, it is provided that the accused petitioner, named above, shall be released on bail of Rs.50,000/- with one suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of learned concerned court subject to the Page No.# 3/3 following conditions that the petitioner: (a) shall co-operate with the remaining investigation. (b) Shall not hamper or tamper with evidence. (c) shall not indulge in any illegal activities. 10. Violation will lead to bail cancellation. 11. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed and disposed of. 12. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant