Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010200462025 2025:GAU-AS:15895 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2957/2025 ARMAN HOSSAIN AND ANR SON OF ABDAR HOSSAIN R/O VILL- JARIDHARIA P.O. GITALDAHA, P.S. DINHATA DIST. COOCH BEHAR, WEST BENGAL, PIN CODE-736175. 2: ARIF ALI S/O AZIM ALI R/O RAGHUNANDAN P.O. BALAKANDI P.S. DINHATA DIST. COOCH BEHAR WEST BENGAL PIN-73617 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SC, NCB Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B CHOWDHURY, MS F RAHMAN,MR. M. ALOM,MR. S R ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : SC, NCB, Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER Date : 21.11.2025 Heard Mr. B. Chowdhury, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Standing counsel assisted by Ms. M. Deka, learned counsel for the NCB. 2. This application filed under section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraskha Sanhita, 2023, the accused petitioners namely, Arman Hossain and Arif Ali, have prayed for bail in connection with NCB GZU Crime No. 08/2025 under Section 8(c) of NDPS Act, r/w Section 22(c)/29 of NDPS Act, 1985. 3. The case arose out of an FIR dated 12.07.2025. The gist of the allegation is that, based on an information, search was conducted in one platforms of Guwahati Railway Station and the present petitioners were allegedly found carrying Methamphetamine tablets, as a passenger in Kanchanjunga Express. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been detained in custody since 12.07.2025 only on the basis of the statement of the co-accused/Tahir Hussain Laskar who was allegedly found possession of the contraband of the Methamphetamine tablets. It is also submitted that the notices under Section 47/48 have not been properly complied with. Another contention of the learned petitioners’ counsel is that they have been arrested only on the basis of the statement of the co-accused and therefore, keeping in mind the principles laid in Toofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu, reported in (2021) 4 SCC 1, the prayer of the petitioners may be considered. 5. The case is stated to be at the stage of investigation and accordingly, the Page No.# 3/5 case diary was called for and the same has been received. 6. The learned Standing counsel, NCB submits that the investigation reveals materials against the present petitioners as well and they were found to be working with the main accused in trafficking of such kind of narcotic substances. It is submitted that the statement of the co-accused as well as the statement of the petitioners which are incriminating in nature and contends that at the stage of investigation the same cannot be looked into. The learned Standing counsel, NCB draws attention to the Court to the notices under Section 47/48 BNSS and to the relevant documents available in the case diary. 7. I have perused the relevant documents pertaining to Section 47/48 BNSS which may be reproduced below – “Arman Hossain, (Male) Age: 22 years S/O: Abdar Hossain Vill.: Jaridharla, PO: Gitaldaha PS:Dinhata, Dist.: Cooch Begar, West Bengal - 736175 Case No. : NCB Guwahati Case No. 08/2025 U/S : 08(c)/22(c)/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 Your are hereby informed that you are arrested in connection with the above reference case and violation of the NDPS Act in connection of seizure of 0.821 Kg of Methamphetamine tablets. The case is no-bailable. So, you will be produced before the Hon’ble Jurisdictional Court. You may submit petition before the Hon’ble Court for your bail. Signature of Arrestee Signature of Investigating Officer Arif Ali, (Male) Age: 23 years S/O: Azim Ali Vill.: Raghnandan, PO: Balakandi PS:Dinhata, Dist.: Cooch Begar, West Bengal - 736175 Page No.# 4/5 Case No. : NCB Guwahati Case No. 08/2025 U/S : 08(c)/22(c)/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 Your are hereby informed that you are arrested in connection with the above reference case and violation of the NDPS Act in connection of seizure of 0.821 Kg of Methamphetamine tablets. The case is no-bailable. So, you will be produced before the Hon’ble Jurisdictional Court. You may submit petition before the Hon’ble Court for your bail. Signature of Arrestee Signature of Investigating Officer” 8. The investigation is so far revealed sufficient materials and investigation is still in the progress and the learned prosecution opposes the bail at this stage. 9. The aforesaid narration was also written in Hindi language and it has been submitted by the learned prosecution that these constituted grounds of arrest which were duly furnished to the petitioners. The purported signature of the accused/petitioners Arman Hossain and Arif Ali, dated 12.07.2025 appeared in the said notice under Section 47 BNSS. 10. I have perused the notice under Section 48 BNSS which was given to Azim Ali and Abdar Hossain, the fathers of the accused persons. Another document dated 12.07.2025 is also available wherein it is stated about telephonic information to relative of the petitioners about their arrest. The said document bears the purported signature of the petitioners/accused on 12.07.2025. 11. Considering the materials, I am reasonably satisfied that there is no non- compliance of Section 47/48 of BNSS so as to constitute violation of constitutional mandate under Section Article 22(1) of Constitution of India. It is well settled law that in terms of Toofan Singh (supra) that a conviction cannot be based solely on the statement of the co-accused. However, no any decision Page No.# 5/5 has been placed before this Court that if the primary materials at the stage of bail adjudication is the statement of the co-accused, then the accused is mandatorily required to be granted bail. Needless to say that, the said aspect can always be taken into account at the stage of consideration of bail. 12. The learned Standing counsel, NCB has drawn attention to the statements of the co-accused and submitted that at the stage of investigation, the same can be taken into account. 13. Considering the nature of the alleged offence and the materials revealed by the investigation; despite the length of pre-trial detention undergone so far – I am of the considered view that it may not be prudent to grant bail to the accused/petitioner at this stage. 14. In such view of the matter, this bail petition is rejected at this stage. 15. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant