Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010235342025 2025:GAU-AS:16519 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3496/2025 HOBIBUR RAHMAN ALIAS HABIBUR RAHMAN SON OF LATE JAMIR UDDIN, R/O LAILAPUR FOREST VILLAGE, P.O. AND P.S. DHOLAI, DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN-788114 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M R SODIAL, MS S Z HAYAT Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER 02.12.2025 Heard Ms. S. Z. Hayat, learned counsel appearing for the accused applicant and Mr. K. K. Das, learned Addl. PP for the State of Assam. 2. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for bail of the accused applicant in connection with NDPS Case No. 55/2025 corresponding to Dholai P.S. Case No. 78/2025 presently pending before the Court of learned Special Judge, NDPS, Cachar, Silchar. 3. The allegation against the accused applicant in the FIR lodged on 26.05.2025 by one S. Gogoi before the Officer-in-Charge, Dholai Police Page No.# 2/4 station is that during search of the house of the accused applicant 101.43 gms of suspected heroin was recovered. Thereafter, an investigation was initiated and ultimately on completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed against the accused applicant as well as his wife under Section 21(b)/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985. The learned counsel appearing for the accused applicant submits that the accused applicant was arrested on 18.09.2025 and for the last 74 days, he has been languishing in the judicial custody. She submits that when the alleged heroin was recovered, the accused applicant was not present in the house and in fact, the house from where the heroin was seized is not belonged the accused applicant and his wife and the same is located in front of the house where the accused applicant and his wife stay. She further submits that the accused applicant is a driver by profession and therefore, though notice was received by him, he could not appear before the learned Trial Court on 3 (three) occasions but he was being represented by his engaged counsel. On the 4th day, when he could not appear, though his counsel was present before the learned Trial Court, the learned Trial Court has issued Non- Bailable Warrant of Arrest (for short, ‘NBWA’) and accordingly, on the basis of the NBWA, the accused applicant was arrested on 18.09.2025. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the accused applicant further submits that by an order dated 03.09.2025 passed in Bail Application No. 2872/2025, the wife of the accused applicant has already been granted bail by a coordinate bench of this Court. 5. In view of the aforesaid factual position, the learned counsel appearing for the accused applicant submits that since the quantity seized is of an intermediate quantity and the charge sheet has already been filed, Page No.# 3/4 the accused applicant should be released on bail taking into account the period of detention already undergone. She further submits that since the seizure of the heroin is of an intermediate quantity, the rigors of Section 37 will not be applicable in the instant case. 6. On the other hand, the learned Addl. PP opposed the grant of bail to the accused applicant on the ground that charge sheet has already been submitted against the accused applicant as well as his wife and there is sufficient materials in the records against the accused applicant. 7. This Court has considered the materials brought on record as well as the TCR placed before this Court. 8. In the instant case, it is seen from the records that charges against the accused applicant are yet to be framed. The trial is yet to be commenced and the accused applicant is already in judicial custody for more than 74 days and the accused applicant is ready to cooperate in the trial, though, he was arrested on the strength of NBWA issued by the learned Trial Court. 9. Taking into account the entire facts involved in the instant case, this Court is of the opinion that further custodial detention of the accused applicant may not be warranted, at this stage. 10. In view of the above, it is directed that the accused applicant, namely, Hobibur Rahman @ Habibur Rahman be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, NDPS, Cachar. However, the bail order shall be subject to the following conditions:- (i) That the accused applicant shall co-operate in the trial of NDPS Page No.# 4/4 Case No. 55/2025, which is pending in the Court of the learned Special Judge, Cachar; (ii) That the accused applicant shall appear before the Trial Court as and when so required by the Trial Court; (iii) That the accused applicant 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 accused applicant; (iv) That the accused applicant shall provide his contact details including photocopies of his Aadhar Card or Driving License or PAN card as well as, mobile number, and other contact details before the Trial Court; (v) That the accused applicant 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 accused applicant shall submit his address and contact details during such leave before the Trial Court; and (vi) That the accused applicant shall not commit any offence while on bail. In view of the aforesaid direction, this Bail Application stands disposed of as allowed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant