Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010244062025 2025:GAU-AS:16521 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3587/2025 SAHABJEE TRIPURA S/O PANDIT KRISNA TRIPURA R/O VILL/P.S. BAIKHORA, JALAIBARI, DIST. SOUTH TRIPURA-799123 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D BHATTACHARJEE, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER 02.12.2025 Heard Mr. D Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the accused - applicant. Also heard Mr. K.K. Das, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for Page No.# 2/3 granting bail to the accused - applicant in connection with Special (NDPS) Case No. 92/2024 under Section 20 (b) (ii) (C) pending in the Court of Sessions Judge, Sribhumi. The gist of the case is that a total amount of 102 Kgs (One Hundred and Two Kgs) of ganza was seized from the truck which was driven by the accused - applicant. It is alleged in the FIR lodged on 02.09.2024 that seizure was made from the conscious possession of the accused -applicant which is much more than commercial quantity as prescribed under the NDPS Act. The learned counsel appearing for the accused - applicant submits that the accused - applicant was arrested on 02.09.2024, since then for last more than 450 days, he is in judicial custody. He submits that taking into consideration, a prolonged incarceration in judicial custody pending the Trial, the accused - applicant should be allowed to go on bail. Mr. K.K. Das, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam, on other hand, submits that the quantity of narcotics seized was more than commercial quantity and therefore, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act will be squarely applicable in the instant case. This Court has gone through the materials brought before this Court as well as the TCR which has been submitted before this Court. It is seen from the TCR that the trial is going on in a reasonable speed and is at the stage of evidence. Being conscious of the mandates of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and being not convinced with the argument of the learned counsel appearing for the Page No.# 3/3 accused - applicant for dispensing with the applicability of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, this Court does not find any merit in the instant bail application and in view of the aforesaid, this bail application is rejected. JUDGE Comparing Assistant