Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010004402025 2025:GAU-AS:2222 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./92/2025 HMINGTEI HAWNCHEU ZOHMINGMAWIE D/O LATE LIANKUNGA R/O AT KHAWZAWL,P.O. AND P.S. KHAWZAWL, PIN-796310, DIST. CHAMPAI, MIZORAM, INDIA. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S D PURKAYASTHA, MS S.S.BORA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK ORDER 04.03.2025 Heard Mr. S. D. Purkayastha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M. P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State. 2) The petitioner, namely, Hmingtei Hawncheu @ Zohmingmawie, daughter of late Liankunga, resident of Khawzawl, Police Station-Khawzawl, District-Champai, Mizoram has filed this application on 07.01.2025 under section 483 BNSS, 2023 praying for her bail in NDPS Case Page No.# 2/4 No. 105/2024, arising out of Silchar Police Station Case No. 558/2024, registered under Sections 22(C)/ 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 corresponding to G.R. No. 1159/2024, presently pending before the Court of learned Special Judge (NDPS) cum Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Cachar, Silchar, in which, she was arrested on 23.06.2024 and is in custody since then. 3) In the meanwhile, out of 10 (ten) named prosecution witnesses in the charge-sheet, prosecution has adduced the evidence of 6 (six) of its witnesses. Considering the same and her length of detention in custody since 23.06.2024, the petitioner has prayed that she should be considered for her bail in said NDPS Case No. 105/2024. 4) According to the petitioner, no such NDPS items were recovered from her possession and the alleged NDPS items were recovered from a house that the petitioner took on rent. 5) Perused the records of NDPS Case No. 105/2024 that was called for by the Court vide order dated 20.01.2025, along with the copy of the case diary of Silchar P.S. Case No. 558/2024. 6) As per the FIR dated 23.06.2024 lodged before the Silchar Police Station, the case is that on receipt of source information that some persons are dealing with NDPS items at an unknown house at Kathal road under the jurisdiction of Silchar Police Station, Silchar P.S. G.D.E No. 04 dated 23.06.2024 was made and police personnel from Silchar Police Station, with due authorisation and with all the relevant items like weighing machine, metallic seal etc. proceeded to Kathal road, Silchar. On reaching the relevant place and as shown by the source person, police personnel from Silchar Police Station with due authorisation for search and seizure, entered the relevant house where the alleged NDPS items were kept for selling and purchasing. The said house of one Fokor Choudhury that was taken on rent by the petitioner was raided by the authorised police personnel from Silchar Police Station on 23.06.2025 in presence of independent witnesses, from which, the present petitioner and another, namely, Sanjoy Roy were apprehended and during such search, 5 Nos. of white coloured polythene packets wrapped with white tape consisting of 40 Nos. of blue and 10 Nos. of black colour plastic packets containing suspected Yaba tablets, 200 Nos. in each packet, in total 10,000 nos. of suspected Yaba tablets were recovered, which were accordingly seized and sealed in presence of independent witnesses. 7) After the arrest of the petitioner and the other accused persons, they were produced before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Silchar on 23.06.2024. 8) From the records of the case, it is seen that after making proper inventory of the seized Page No.# 3/4 NDPS items, it was forwarded to the FSL for its necessary examination and report and the FSL report dated 16.08.2024 affirmed that the seized substances in said Silchar P.S. Case No. 558/2024 contains Methamphetamine, a scheduled NDPS item. 9) From the records of the case, it is also seen that on completion the investigation of said Silchar P.S. Case No. 558/2024, Police submitted the charge-sheet in the case on 25.08.2024 against the petitioner and the other accused Sanjoy Roy under Sections 22(C)/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985. 10) After filing of the charge-sheet in said Silchar P.S. Case No. 558/2024, the said case was re- registered as NDPS Case No. 105/2024, in which, the learned Special Judge (NDPS) cum Sessions Judge, Cachar, Silchar on 28.08.2024 took cognizance of the offence and on 05.10.2024, the said Judge transferred the said NDPS Case No. 105/2024 to the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Cachar, Silchar for its disposal. 11) It is seen that after framing of charge on 26.11.2024 under Sections 22(C)/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 against the petitioner and the other accused person of the case, i.e., namely, Sanjoy Roy, the learned Court of Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Cachar, Silchar as on 13.02.2025 has recorded the evidence of six of the prosecution witnesses out of the ten named prosecution witnesses in the charge-sheet of the case. 12) Mr. M. P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam submitted that 27.02.2025 was the last date fixed for recording of evidence of the other witnesses and 13.03.2025 is the next date fixed for recording of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. 13) Considering the above, it is found that the right of the accused petitioner to have speedy trial has not been infringed. 14) Law is well settled that in heinous offences, like in the present case, once trial commences and the prosecution starts examining its witnesses, the Court, be it the Trial Court or the High Court, should be loath in entertaining the Bail Application of the accused persons. Once the trial commences, it should be allowed to reach to its final conclusion, which may either result in the conviction of the accused or acquittal of the accused. The moment the High Court exercise its discretion in the favour of the accused and orders release of the accused on bail by looking into the deposition of the victim, it will have its own impact on the pending trial when it comes to appreciating the oral evidence of the victim. It is only in the event if the trial gets duly delayed Page No.# 4/4 and that too for no fault on the part of the accused, the Court may be justified in ordering the release of the accused on bail on the ground that the right of the accused to have a speedy trial has been infringed. [X Vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in (2024) INSC 909 = 2024 STPL 12498 SC] 15) Mr. Purkayastha, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that considering the evidence of the prosecution witness Nos. 1 and 3, the charge framed under Section 22(C)/ 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 against the petitioner is vitiated and the petitioner should be considered for her bail. 16) However, considering the decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of X Vs. State of Rajasthan (supra) and in the case of Narcotics Control Bureau Vs. Kashif; the recovery of 10,000 nos. of suspected Yaba tablets containing Methamphetamine, a scheduled NDPS item, being affirmed by the FSL report, from the possession of the petitioner, i.e., the house that was taken on rent by the petitioner and also considering the fact that evidence of six out of ten prosecution witnesses have already been recorded till date, the Court is of the view that it is not a fit case to grant bail to the petitioner in said NDPS Case No. 105/2024, arising out of Silchar Police Station Case No. 558/2024, presently pending before the Court of learned Special Judge (NDPS) cum Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Cachar, Silchar. 17) It is also noted that the petitioner is from District-Champai of the State of Mizoram. 18) Accordingly, this bail application of the petitioner, namely Hmingtei Hawncheu @ Zohmingmawie, daughter of late Liankunga in said NDPS Case No. 105/2024, arising out of Silchar Police Station Case No. 558/2024, presently pending before the Court of learned Special Judge (NDPS) cum Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Cachar, Silchar stands rejected at this stage. JUDGE Comparing Assistant