Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010255852025 2025:GAU-AS:16420 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3732/2025 CHINLAM WIFE OF SESAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE P.S.- CHURACHANDPUR, DISTRICT LAMKA, MANIPUR. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR N AHMED, IMDADUL ISLAM,M RAHMAN,MR A BASUMATARY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER 01.12.2025 Heard Mr. N. J. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the accused applicant and Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. PP for the State of Assam. 2. This is an application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 praying for Page No.# 2/7 granting bail to the accused applicant in connection with NDPS Case No. 70/2025 registered under Section 22(c)/25/29 of NDPS Act, 1985 pending before the Court of learned District and Sessions/ Special Judge, Cachar, Silchar, Assam. 3. The gist of the allegation against the accused applicant in this case is that on 25.05.2025, one Debabrat Das, SI of Police Station had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Silchar Sadar Police Station, inter alia, alleging that on receipt of an information through some reliable sources regarding transportation of suspected contraband concealed inside a grey colour car bearing registration No. AS-26A-2522, coming from Mizoram side, a search team was constituted and a naka checking was organized at strategic location. During the aforesaid naka checking, the aforesaid car was intercepted and during the search operation, 3 persons including 2 females were found inside the car. The present applicant was also one of the persons present in the aforesaid car. 4. During the search operation, 14 numbers of soap cases were recovered from the seized vehicle containing suspected heroin and on weighing the suspected contraband materials, the weight of the same was found to be of 1239 gms of suspected heroin. On completion of the investigation, charge sheet has been submitted against the accused applicant along with others under Section 21(c)/25/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985. 5. Mr. N. J. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the accused applicant submits that there is a total violation of section 48 of BNSS, 2023 while arresting the accused applicant by the arresting authorities which goes to the root of the process of the arrest of the accused applicant violating Page No.# 3/7 Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India as well as the mandates of Section 48 of the BNSS, 2023. He further submits that the accused applicant was not served with a notice under Section 48 of BNSS, 2023 and reportedly, a notice under Section 48 of BNSS, 2023 by way of a WT Msg to the relative of the accused applicant was sent to the jurisdictional Police station. He submits that, however, there is nothing on record that the said notice was actually served on the relatives of the accused applicant. He submits that the grounds of arrest were not mentioned in the WT Msg which only contained the information relating to the arrest of the accused applicant and hence, there is a clear violation of the ratios as laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Vihaan Kumar-vs- State of Haryana & Another reported in 2025 SCC OnLine 269. The learned counsel appearing for the accused applicant further referred to the case of Ahmed Mansoor & Ors-vs- the State represented by the Assistant Commissioner of Police & Anr (Criminal Appeal No. 4505/2025), wherein, the Hon’ble Apex Court had laid down that communication of grounds of arrest to the relative of the petitioner, which is mandatory in nature, if not complied with, the same is a ground for granting bail to the accused applicant. 6. He further submits that other co-accuseds, namely, Sharuk Ali @ Saruk Ali and Muhamada @ Muhaba were granted bail by a coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 11.11.2025 on the grounds of non compliance of Section 48 of the BNSS, 2023. 7. Mr. B. Sarma, the learned Addl. PP submits that Section 48 of BNSS notice is available on record, though there is no mention or affirmation as to receipt of the same by any nominated friend or relative of the accused Page No.# 4/7 applicant. He further submits that WT Msg was sent to all the Officers-in- Charge of Surachandpur Police Station with the information of the arrest of the accused applicant. Therefore, he submits that since the grounds of arrest have already been given to the accused applicant under Section 47 of BNSS, 2023, there is no violation of statutory mandates of BNSS. 8. This Court has considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and has gone through the records of NDPS Case No. 70/2025 which has been submitted before this Court. 9. After considering the materials on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the aforementioned WT Msg which was sent to all Officers-in-Charge of Surachandpur Police without mentioning any grounds of arrest of the accused applicant, the arresting authority has not complied with the mandates of Section 48 of BNSS, 2023. There is no material on record to indicate that pursuant to the said WT Msg, the relatives/ friends/ nominated persons of the accused applicant were in fact intimated about the arrest of the accused applicant. 10. It is seen from the WT Msg that though the information was requested to be given to the family members/ relatives/ friends about the arrest of the accused applicant, no such material could be found in the record indicating such compliance and receipt of any such information by family members/ relatives/ nominated person about the arrest of the accused applicant. 11. This Court has also found a document which mentioned that notice under Section 48 of BNSS addressed to one Sesang Falai under Page No.# 5/7 information to friends/ relatives/ disclosure of nominated person of the arrestee with details of the facts of the case as well as grounds of arrest but nothing indicated that the same was sent or received by the aforesaid Sesang Falai. However, there is a note present in the aforesaid notice which indicated that the relatives of the accused applicant was intimated or communicated about the arrest via WT Msg through their jurisdictional Police Station and also the same was informed over telephone. The aforesaid note does not indicate that who was actually informed over telephone, rather, it seems, that the jurisdictional Police Station was intimated by the arresting authority over the telephone in addition to sending the WT Msg to the jurisdictional Police Station. This is apparent that none of the documents actually indicate or confirm any receipt of grounds of arrest of the accused applicant by any of his family members/relatives/ nominated friends. 12. In view of the aforesaid discussions on the materials available on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the mandates of Section 48 of BNSS, 2023 was not complied with by the arresting authority while arresting the accused applicant, which goes to the root of the process of the arresting and making the same violative of Article 21 & 22 (1) of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the arrest of the accused applicant becomes illegal being against the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India. 13. This Court has also considered the aforementioned order passed by a coordinate bench of this Court in BA No.3085/2025, wherein, 2 (two) co- accused persons who have been also arrested at the same time of the arrest of the accused applicant, were granted bail. Page No.# 6/7 14. In consideration of the whole matter available before this Court, this Court directs that the accused applicant, namely, Chinlam, shall be allowed to go on bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with 2 sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, Cachar, Silchar subject to the following conditions:- (i) That the accused applicant shall cooperate in the trial of NDPS Case No. 70/2025, arising out of Silchar P.S. Case No. 551/2025, under Sections 21(c)/25/29 of NDPS Act, 1985; (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 accused applicant; (iv) That the accused applicant shall provide their contact details including photocopies of their Adhaar Card or Driving License or PAN Card, 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 their address and contact details during such leave before the trial court; and (vi) That the accused applicant shall not commit any offence Page No.# 7/7 while on bail . In view of the aforesaid directions, the instant bail application stands disposed of as allowed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant