Page No.# 1/9 GAHC010005572025 2025:GAU-AS:5191 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./102/2025 SRI JOHORLAL MORANG S/O LATE BEDAL MORANG VILL- BORDUBI CHANONG P.S. PANIGAON, DIST. LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M K NEOG, MR. S K SINGHA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI ORDER Date : 29.04.2025 Heard Mr. S. K. Singha, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. K. Parashar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State respondent. 2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Page No.# 2/9 Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail to the petitioner i.e. Johorlal Morang, who has been arrested on 08.06.2024 in connection with North Lakhimpur P.S. Case No.152/2024 registered under Section 21(c)/29 of the NDPS Act arising out of G.R. Case No.400/2024. 3. The brief facts of the case is that on 06-06-2024, one Sri Hirak Jyoti Lahan of Khelmati O.P. under North Lakhimpur Police Station has received an information from a reliable informer at around 10 P.M. that a huge amount of Heroin in a Maruti Suzuki Swift Vehicle bearing Regd. No. AS07BM6450 on which a GDE was made in Khelmati OP GDE No. 117 dated 06-06-2024 and after informing the same to S.P. and Addl. S.P. (Crime) North Lakhimpur and O.C. North Lakhimpur P.S., a search team headed by Ins. Tulumoni Dowarah along with some other police personnel proceeded to N.L. Town by using two Govt. Vehicle(BOLERO) bearing Regd. No. AS-30-8868 & AS-30-9029 to search the swift vehicle and about 10.30 P.M. noticed the said vehicle at Charaimoria Bypass coming from Lilabari side to chauldhuwa which was chased down infront of Chauldhwa O.P. after informing the O.C. North Lakhimpur P.S. Thereafter, they detained the persons namely 1. Maruf Ahmed Khan, 29 years, son of Aftab Ahmed Khan, of village Kaliganj, Dist- Karimganj, 2. Hussain Ahmed, 34 years, son of Fakaruddin Tapadar of village Alam Khani, Karimganj, 3. Ifzal Hussain, 19 years, son of Lt. Burhan Uddin of village Ala Kalipur, Badarpur, Karimganj and search the vehicle thoroughly. During search they revealed that they carried 45 packets (soap case box) Heroin from Hojai and delivered 20 packets (soap case Box) to a person at Laluk Page No.# 3/9 and another 25 packets(soap case Box) delivered to namely Smti Tagar Patir and her husband Sri Jayanta Patir, of Chaboti Lohar Dolong, P.S. North Lakhimpur, Dist- Lakhimpur, Assam and also seized cash Rupees 5,900 (Five Thousand Nine Hundred) INR and three mobile phone in front of Chauldhowa O.P. in presence of witness. After completion of seizing procedure the police team had proceeded to Tagar Patir house along with seized items and the detained persons at 12.15 A.M. and reached at 1.05 A.M., at the mean time Addl. S.P. (Crime) reached the PO and gave a written authority letter for operation of entry, search, seizer, arrest etc. during the search no any suspected items were found at her house but seized 3 mobile phone and two numbers of two wheeler bearing regd No, AS-07-U-5176 & AS-07-Y-4041. On questioning Tagar Patir and her husband Jayanta Patir revealed that on 06-06-2024 at about 8.20 P.M. they took 25 packets of Heroin from Maruf Ahmed Khan and his compainion. Her husband Jayanta Patir kept the heroin in his father-in-law house namely Jaharlal Morang of Bordubi Chanong, Panigaon. After getting the information the search team were proceeded to Bordubi Chanong and reached at about 3.40 A.M. lead by Tagar Patir, Jayanta Patir and Maruf Ahmed Khan. In the mean time, O.C. Panigaon arrived at the spot with staff and three numbers of independent witnesses namely 1. Manuranjan Pegu son of Gesia Pegu of Kahidhuwar, P.S.-Panigaon, 2. Nameswar Pegu, son of Lt. Patang Pegu of bordubi, Panigaon, and 3. Lakhindra Doley son of Lambudhar Doley of Bardubi Chanong, Panigaon During Search 25 Packets (291.69 gram) of (soap case Box) Heroin were found in front of independent witnesses and also seized Page No.# 4/9 one Karbon keypad mobile phone. After completion of all official and lawful formalities a case was registered and the petitioner was arrested. Accordingly, the instant bail application has been filed. 4. Mr. S. K. Singha, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the arresting authority while arresting the petitioner has not informed the grounds of arrest to him and as such, the fundamental and constitutional rights guaranteed to him under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India has been totally infringed by the arresting authority. He accordingly submits that the petitioner is entitled to be released forthwith. 5. Per contra, Mr. K. K. Parashar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam fairly draws the attention of the Court from the case records that the Notice issued under Section 50 of Cr.P.C to the petitioner as well as the Memo of Arrest does not indicate that the grounds of such arrest has been informed to the petitioner at the time of his arrest. 6. I have considered the submissions advanced by the learned Counsels for both the parties and also perused the material available on record. 7. The primary ground urged in this bail application is as regard non-compliance of the constitutional and fundamental right of guaranteed under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India. Apt to refer to Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India, which reads as hereunder:- Page No.# 5/9 “21. Protection of life and personal liberty.—No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. 22. Protection against arrest and detention in certain cases.—(1) No person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest nor shall he be denied the right to consult, and to be defended by, a legal practitioner of his choice.” 8. Perusal of the aforesaid provision, it is apparent that an arrestee has a constitutional and fundamental right under the Constitution of India to be informed about the grounds of his arrest at the time of his arrest. 9. In the present case apt to refer to the notice issued to the petitioner under Section 50 of the Cr.P.C., which reads as hereunder: - “NOTICE U/S- 50 C.R.P.C. To, Shri: Jagalal Morang Age:59 years S/o- Late Dota Morang Village- 11 Mile Post Office: Kuhiarbari Police Station: Panigaon District: Lakhimpur Reference: North Lakhimpur P.S. Case No. 152/2024 U/S 21(c)/29 NDPS Act. You are hereby information that you are under arrest in Page No.# 6/9 connection with above reference case is non-bailable to Police. So, you are forwarded to the Court. You may submit petition before Hon’ble Court for your bail. SIGNATURE OF ARRESTEE SIGNATURE OF ARRESTING OFFICER” 10. Perusal of the aforesaid notice indicates that except the name of the petitioner and case reference, no other information as regards the offence or the grounds of arrest is intimated to the petitioner in this notice. 11. Apt also to refer to the memo of arrest which reads as hereunder: - “ARREST MEMO HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORDER IN WRIT PETITION NO. (CRL) 539 OF 1986 AND WRIT PETITION (CRL) No. 592 OF 1987 (1) Name and particulars of person arrested: Sri Jagalal Morang, age- 59 years S/o- Lt. Dota Morang Vill- 11 Mile, Panigaon P.S. Panigaon Dist- Lakhimpur, Assam. 2. Circumstances/P.S/Case/ GDE Reference of Arrest:- NL PS C/No-152/24, u/s- 21(c)/29 NDPS Act 3. Place of Arrest:- NL PS 4. Date and Time of Arrest: On 08/06/24 @ 8.00 am. 5. Injuries present at time of Arrest:- As per inspection memo. (If yes, make Inspection Memo on reverse) Page No.# 7/9 6. Signature and Name of Relative/ Witness to Arrest (Atleast one) 7. Signature of Arrested person:- 8. Signature & Full Name of Arresting- Officer (Also add. Any Note “Toka” if reqd.)” 12. Perusal of the memo of arrest also indicates that except the name and particulars of the petitioner, date and time of arrest and case reference, no other information as regards the offence or grounds of arrest is mentioned. Similarly, the Inspection Memo which is also reproduced hereunder for ready reference does not indicate any particulars as regards the grounds of arrest being intimated to the petitioner: - “INSPECTION MEMO HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORDER IN WRIT PETITION NO. (CRL) 539 OF 1986 AND WRIT PETITION (CRL) No. 592 OF 1987 (1) Name of Police Officer: WSI Sunmoni Gogoi. (2) Name of Arrestee with full particulars, Age, Sex, etc: Sri Jagalal Morang, age- 59 years Vill- 11 Mile, Panigaon P.S. Panigaon Dist- Lakhimpur, Assam. (3) Date & time of arrest: On 08.06.2024 at 8.00 AM (4) Cash Ref./ GDE Ref. etc. :- NLPS C/No. 152/2024, u/s 21(C)/29 NDPS Act. (5) Injury whether Major/Minor:- No injury (6) Doctors where Medical Aids provided :- Nowboicha CHC (7) Sign. Of Arrestee:- Sign. Of Police Officer who made Arrest” Page No.# 8/9 13. It appears from the materials placed before this Court that there are no materials available in the case record to indicate that the grounds of arrest have been informed to the petitioner at the time of his arrest. Moreover, the case record does not indicate any contemporaneous record indicating that the grounds of arrest were informed to the accused. 14. There is no doubt that the requirement of informing a person arrested of grounds of arrest is a mandatory requirement of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India. Non-compliance of Article 22(1) will be a violation of the constitutional and fundamental rights guaranteed by the said Article. That apart, it will amount to a violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Hence, such arrest shall stand vitiated. When a violation of Article 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India is established, the statutory restrictions do not affect the power of the Court to grant bail. In fact, it is the duty of the Court to forthwith order the release of the accused when a violation of Article 22(1) is established (Refer:- Vihaan Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Anr., reported in 2025 SCConline 269). In the present case it is absolutely clear that the grounds of arrest was not informed to the petitioner at the time of his arrest, hence, the arrest of the petitioner is totally illegal. As such, the arrest of the petitioner stands vitiated. That being so, the rigor of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985 does not affect the power of this Court to grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, further detention of the petitioner in the custody is totally unjustified. Page No.# 9/9 15. In view of the aforesaid, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is liable to be released forthwith. Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing of a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/-(rupees fifty thousand) only with two sureties of like amount, provided that one surety has to be a Government Servant to the satisfaction of the Special Judge (NDPS), Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur under the conditions that the petitioner: (a) That the accused/petitioner shall regularly appear before the learned trial Court on all dates to be fixed from time to time till the case is disposed of; (b) That the accused/petitioner 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court; and (c) That the accused/petitioner shall refrain from committing any offences similar to the one of which he is accused; 16. In terms of the above, the bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant