Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010137342025 2025:GAU-AS:14295 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2128/2025 ALI SAHEB S/O LATE HABIULLA R/O VILL- KARALA P.S. SAHEBGANJ, DIST. COOCH BEHAR, WEST BENGAL, PIN-736135 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R AHMED, MS B H SHIRIN,MR. M R SODIAL Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS O R D E R 27.10.2025 Heard Mr. R. Ahmed, learned counsel for the accused petitioners as well as Mr. J. Chutia, learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State respondents. Page No.# 2/4 2. This application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Ali Saheb, seeking regular bail in connection with Guwahati GRPS Case No.78/2024, under Sections 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985. The accused person is stated to have been arrested on 21.03.2024. 3. The allegation in the FIR was that on 20.03.2024 in the early hours some police personnel of Guwahati GRPS conducted checking of luggage of passengers in coach No.B-4 of 12516 DN Silchar Coimbatore Express at PF No.04 of Ghy Rly Station and while checking one of bag of the petitioner, he became nervous and subsequently, he was brought down from the train and upon opening the bag, 50 numbers of blue coloured plastic packets containing 200 numbers of suspected YABA tablets each was found totalling about 10,000 tablets. 4. The aforesaid psychotropic substances stated to be falling in the packet of commercial quantity. The investigation resulted in a charge-sheet and the case was stated to be at the stage of trial before the Court of learned Special Judge, Kamrup(M). 5. The petitioner counsel submits that an additional affidavit has been filed to bring on record a W.T. message of notice of arrest, which was sent to the concerned police station to be served upon the relative of the accused. 6. The scanned case record is available. 7. The learned Addl. P.P. fairly submits that he does not instruction as to whether W.T. message upon the family members was served upon them. Nevertheless, the W.T. message is also bereft of other details apart from informing that the accused petitioner has been arrested in connection with the Page No.# 3/4 above noted case. 8. The aforesaid nature of the notices under Section 50/50A Cr.P.C. as its existed then would not meet the standards laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Prabir Purkayastha-vs- State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (2024) 8 SCC 254 and the Vihaan Kumar Vs. State of Haryana & Anr. 2025 LiveLaw SC 169 so as to fulfil the mandate of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India. 9. In those judgments, it has not been held that the principles would be applicable only prospectively and not retrospectively and therefore, though the alleged seizure was made in March, 2024, the principles laid down would be applicable. The present case being one pertaining to alleged commercial quantity of psychotropic substances under the NDPS Act – the rigors of Section 37 would be applicable. However, it has been held in Vihaan Kumar (supra), that the accused is found entitled to bail on the basis of procedural infirmity in the arrest documents, such right would prevail over any statutory bar on bail. 10. Accordingly, in the given facts and circumstances, the question of determination of Section 37 becomes academic as due to the procedural infirmity at the time of arrest in the two notices, the present petitioner is found to be entitled to bail. Accordingly, the accused petitioner is hereby allowed to go on bail of Rs. 75,000/- with one surety of like amount, to the satisfaction of the concerned learned Addl. Sessions No.5, Kamrup (M) and subject to the following conditions that:- (i) He shall be available for the remaining trial. (ii) He shall not hamper or tamper with the evidence. (iii) He shall not try to influence with the witnesses. Page No.# 4/4 (iv) He shall not in any manner indulge in any illegal activities, including activities prohibited by the NDPS Act. 11. Violation of bail conditions will entail cancellation of the bail. 12. This bail application stands allowed and disposed of. 13. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant