Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010235462024 2025:GAU-AS:9172 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3769/2024 KRISHNA MAHAPATRA MALI S/O LAE SHANKAR MAHAPATRA MALI RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 4, MOREH PREM NAGAR, OPPOSIE TO BORDER HOTEL, P.O. AN DP.S. MOREH, DIST. TENGNOPAL MANIPUR, PI-795131. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA REP BY STANDING COUNSEL NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. M KUMARI, MR. M KALITA,B U LASKAR,MR D NANDI Advocate for the Respondent : SC, NCB, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 15.07.2025 1. Heard Ms. M. Kumari, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. C. Keyal, the learned standing counsel NCB. 2. This application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the Page No.# 2/6 petitioner, namely, Sri Krishna Mahapatra Mali, who has been detained behind the bars since 08.03.2021 (for more than 4 years 4 months) in connection with NDPS Case No. 131/2021, under Sections 22(C)/29 of NDPS Act, 1985 corresponding to NCB Crime No. 06/2021 presently pending before the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Kamrup (M). 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on receipt of an information from a reliable source the NCB officials on 06.03.2021 intercepted one FORD car bearing registration No. MN-05-A-7260 and apprehended two persons from the said car including the present petitioner. On search of the said car, 10 kg and 276 grams of methamphetamine tablet were recovered there from. After filing of the final complaint by the NCB and after framing of charges, the trial commenced and presently same is pending before the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Kamrup (M). 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been wrongly implicated in this case. She submits that the petitioner out of curiocity accompanied Safikur Rahman on his way to Guwahati in his FORD car. However, when the said vehicle reached Sonapur it was intercepted by NCB officials and contraband was recovered from the said car. She submits that petitioner was unaware about the fact of presences of contraband in the car in which he was travelling. She also submits that the petitioner has been detained behind the bars for last 4 years 4 months and till date only two prosecution witnesses have been examined. She also submits that the petitioner is seeking bail on the ground of violation of his Constitutional rights protected under Article 21 of the Constitution of India on account of his prolonged incarceration. She has also submitted that the co-accused as well as the co-passenger who were arrested along with the petitioner when the vehicle in which the contraband was found was Page No.# 3/6 intercepted, has already been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 22.05.2025 in BA No. 1388/2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the petitioner was also not furnished the grounds of arrest at the time when he was arrested in this case. On the aforesaid grounds, she has prayed for allowing the petitioner to go on bail. 5. On the other hand, Mr. S. C. Keyal, learned standing counsel, NCB has vehemently opposed in granting bail of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner was found in conscious possession of Methaphetamine tablet which weights more than 10 kg which is of commercial quantity. Therefore, he submits that embargo of Section 37 of NDPS Act is applicable in this case. He also submits that the petitioner himself got involved in this offence and he agreed to transported methamphetamine tablets from Monipur to Guwahati along with Safiqur Rahaman and sufficient findings on this account is available in record. He also submits that the trial got delayed also on account of adjournments sought for by the counsel for defence side on four occasions when the witnesses were present before the court. He therefore submits that the benefit of bail on the ground of prolonged incarceration may not be granted to the petitioner as he himself is the cause for such delay in trial. 6. Learned counsel for the NCB has also submitted that three of the co-accused namely, Ramesh G, Thiyagarajan M and Ganesh G @ Ganesh who approached this Court for bail in this case and their prayer for bail was rejected by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. 7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the sides and have also gone through the materials available on record including the scanned copy of NDPS Case No. 131/2021. Page No.# 4/6 8. In this case though the petitioner has prayed for bail on many grounds. His main ground is that he has been languishing behind the bars for more than 4 years 4 months and only two witnesses out of listed 15 prosecution witnesses have been examined in this case and due to such prolonged incarceration the fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India has been violated. 9. On perusal of the records of this case it appears that adjournments were taken by both sides on different occasions. The fact remains that for whatsoever reason the trial court has not able to examine any further witnesses beyond two only out of total 15 listed prosecution witnesses. The apex court has observed in several of its Rulings that prolonged incarceration overrides the embargo of Section 37 of NDPS Act and under such circumstances the accused is entitled to get bail. 10. In the instant case only two persons were found in the vehicle from which contraband was recovered namely, the petitioner and one from Safiqur Rahaman and the said Safiqur Rahaman has already been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 22.05.2025 in BA 1388/2025. 11. This Court is of considered opinion that for whatsoever reason if delay is caused and the petitioner is kept under incarceration for a long period and there is slow progress in the trial and there is no hope of early culmination of the trial. Such circumstances would certainly be violative of the fundamental right of the petitioner guaranteed to him under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The incarceration of 4 years 4 months is long enough to consider it as violative of the fundamental right of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Hence, this Court is of considered opinion that the petitioner is entitle to get bail on the ground of prolonged incarceration only. Page No.# 5/6 12. Accordingly, the above-named petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs. 1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh only) with a suitable surety of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Kamrup(M); with following conditions that:- i. That the petitioner shall cooperate in the trial of NDPS Case No. 131/2021, which is pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, 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 in the trial pending against the present petitioners; iv. That the petitioner shall provide his contact details including photocopies of his Aadhar Card or Driving License or PAN card, 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. Page No.# 6/6 13. With the above observations, this bail application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant