Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010186232025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2744/2025 DEBASHISH PAUL SON OF SUJIT PAUL R/O TIKAL POINT SALGANGAPAR P.O. SALGANGAPAR P.S. UDHARBOND DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM PIN CODE-788031. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE STANDING COUNSEL, NCB Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N J DUTTA, B AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : SC, NCB, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER Date : 18-02-2026 Heard Mr. N.J Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. R.K. Choudhury, learned Dy. ASGI appearing for the respondent/Union of India. The petitioner was taken into custody on 03.03.2024 in connection with NDPS Page No.# 2/3 Case No. 300/2024 u/s 22(C)/29 of NDPS Act corresponding to NCB Crime Case No. 02/2024 and the matter is now pending trial before the learned Sessions (Special) Judge, No.5 Kamrup (M), Guwahati. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that notice under section 50 Cr.P.C furnished to the petitioner did not contain the detail of the case in which he has been arrested and therefore, the arrest would be wrong. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted though the case number, the Police Station case number etc. are available, the ground of arrest has not been explained nor giving in writing as it would be apparent from the notice which is at page-52 of the bail petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also drawn the attention of this Court to the memorandum of arrest and submits that though it contain the signature of the petitioner it does not reflect the attestation by any family, friends, relatives or respectful persons who were witnesses to the arrest of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in view of the non attestation of memorandum of arrest, by applying the provisions of Cr.P.C, the arrest itself had been rendered illegal. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred to the order dated 15.05.2025 passed in B.A No. 864/2025 and the order dated 30.07.2025 passed in B.A No. 427/2025 which relate to the co-accused of the petitioner in the same case and in which the co-accused have been granted the privilege of bail to the two co-accused. The written objection filed by the learned Standing counsel for the opposite party Union of India/NCB has been referred to by the learned Dy. ASGI who submits that the arrest of the petitioner was effected strictly in accordance with law after due communication of ground of arrest and due intimidation to the relatives and friends as mandated under section 50 & 50A of Cr.P.C corresponding to section 47 & 48 of the BNSS. This Court on the perusal of the documents available before it finds that the notice under section 50 of Cr.P.C does not refer to the ground of arrest of the Page No.# 3/3 petitioner. This Court also noticed that the memorandum of arrest is not attested as required under the provision of the relevant law. In such circumstances, this Court has no option but to hold that the further detention of the petitioner on such basis of such arrest is liable for interference. This Court cannot lose sight of the fact that the petitioner has been accused of being involved in acts which has been violated of the NDPS Act. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that the petitioner can be granted the privilege of bail in connection with the NDPS Case No. 300/2024 arising out of NCB Case No. 02/2024 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 1 lakh with two sureties of the like amount, out of which, one of the sureties should be a Government employee of the State of Assam, to the satisfaction of learned Sessions (Special) Judge No. 5, Kamrup(M), Guwahati, Assam. The direction for bail is further subject to the conditions that the petitioner; (a) shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of learned Sessions (Special) Judge No. 5, Kamrup (M), Guwahati, Assam without prior written permission from him/her till disposal of the case; (b) shall regularly attend the trial court and cooperate with the court for early disposal of the case; and (c) shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court. The observation made by the Court is for the purpose of this bail application only, not on merits of the case. Violation or breach of any condition(s) shall render cancellation of bail. The bail application is disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant