Page No.# 1/4 GAHC030004072025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./26/2025 Sh. Sabir Ali S/o Bais Ali R/o Masly, Bhanga Bazaar, Karimjanj District, Assam VERSUS The State of Mizoram and 2 Ors. R/b the Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram, Excise and Narcotic Department, Aizawl 2:The Officer-in-Charge Excise and Narcotics Dept. Aizawl 3:S.I R. Lalrinsanga (Complainant) Excise and Narcotics Dept. Aizaw Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. S. Vanlalhriata Advocate for the Respondent : P.P./Addl.PP, Mizoram for R 1-2 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARLI VANKUNG ORDER Date : 24.07.2025 Heard Mr. S. Vanlalhriata, learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner along with Mrs. Mary L. Khiangte, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondents. Page No.# 2/4 2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) r/w Section 37 of the ND&&PS Act, 1985 for the enlargement of the accused petitioner on bail pending trial in SR No. 390/2023. 3. Mr. S. Vanlalhriata, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was arrested on 28.08.2023 at 10:45 pm on the seizure of 2 kgs (149 soap cases) of Heroin kept and sealed inside the secret chamber made on the floor of a Bolero Pick-up registration No. AS 10 AC-1929 at Seling village. The petitioner being the handyman of the said vehicle was arrested along with the co-accused Bokul Uddin, who was the driver of the vehicle whereby Excise Case No. EX.N-243/2023 was registered U/s 21(c) of the ND&PS Act. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been in custody since 28.08.2023 till date and the trial against the petitioner is not completed till date, even though charge sheet was submitted before the Trial Court on 23.10.2023. He submits that the case is now at its evidence stage, wherein only 4 prosecution witnesses, i.e. PW-1, PW-2, PW-8 & PW-10 were examined till date. He submits that since only 4 (four) prosecution witnesses have been examined till date out of 12 nos. of prosecution witnesses, it is not likely that the trial would be completed in the near future. The learned counsel further submitted that the co-accused in the instant case i.e., Bokul Uddin driver of the said vehicle was granted bail on 22.05.2025 by this court in Bail Application No. 14/2025 and therefore, the instant petitioner may also be released on bail, by upholding the principles of equity and justice. 5. Mrs. Mary L. Khiangte, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondents, on the other hand, has strongly objected to the release of the petitioner on bail, by submitting that the petitioner is not a permanent resident Page No.# 3/4 of Mizoram and therefore, there is every likelihood of him absconding during the trial of the case which is now at its evidence stage. She further submits that there is every likelihood of the petitioner being convicted U/s 21(c) ND&PS Act since the seized article was seized from their possession i.e., from the vehicle wherein both the accused persons were also in the vehicle and therefore, is not entitled to be released on bail as per Section 37 of the ND&PS Act. 6. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsels for both the parties and on perusal of the documents on record, it is seen that as many as 12 prosecution witnesses have been cited in this case, out of which only 4 prosecution witnesses have been examined, in spite of the fact that the charge sheet was submitted on 23.10.2023. It is also seen that the co-accused, who is the driver of the vehicle from whom the seized article was seized was granted bail on 22.05.2025, since the trial against the said accused was not completed in spite of this court’s order dated 22.08.2024 directing the learned Trial Court to complete the examination of the prosecution witnesses within a period of 4 (four) months, wherein at the time of passing the said order only 4 prosecution witnesses were examined out of the 12 listed prosecution witnesses. It is seen that till today, no additional prosecution witnesses appear to have been examined since 22.08.2024, in spite of this court’s order dated 22.08.2024. Thus, it appears that there has been no progress regarding the examination of the prosecution witnesses since this court’s order dated 22.08.2024. 7. In view of the above facts, wherein there has been no progress in the trial of the case since 22.08.2024 and considering the fact that the co-accused has already been granted bail on 22.05.2025, this court finds it appropriate to also grant bail to the accused petitioner with a bail bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees Page No.# 4/4 one lakh) only with one surety with a bond of the like amount, who shall be to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. The learned Trial Court may also impose any conditions as deemed fit in the bail condition to ensure that the accused petitioner does not abscond during the trial of the case. 8. Accordingly, Bail Appln. No. 26 of 2025 stands allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant