Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010027902025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./362/2025 ANSHARUL ISLAM S/O NUR AMIN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE VILLAGE BARBHETI, PS NAGAON SADAR, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PP GOVT OF ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MS A HUSSAIN, DARAK ULLAH,S AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 08.04.2025 1. Heard Mr. S. Ahmed, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State re- spondent. 2. This application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Ansharul Page No.# 2/6 Islam, who has been detained behind the bars since 04.01.2025 (for the last 97 days) in connection with Nagaon P.S. Case No.14/2025 under Sec- tions 61(2)/123 of BNS R/W 22(c)/25/29 of NDPS Act, 1985. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 03.01.2025, one Antony Koch of Nagaon Police Station had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Nagaon Police Station, inter-alia, alleging that an information was re- ceived through reliable sources that one Abu Bakkr Siddique of Rupahi Tiniali have procured narcotic drugs and is carrying the same to Nagaon in his scooty. Accordingly, a naka checking was conducted near Mohkhuli. 4. During naka checking, the scooty bearing Registration No. AS-02-AE-9110 was intercepted. The said scooty was driven by one Abu Bakkr Siddique. During the search of the scooty, 65 numbers of Codilus T cough syrup were recovered from the scooty. The said accused, namely, Abu Bakkr Siddique was arrested and was interrogated. During interrogation, he re- vealed that he has stored bulk stock of narcotic drugs in his house at Ru- pahi Tiniali. 5. Accordingly, a search was made in his house and the following narcotic substances were seized from his house: i. 24 (twenty-four) nos. of strips of Nitrazepam Tablets containing 1200 Tablets ii. 2 (two) nos. of strips of Sampex Tablets containing Tramadol (each strip containing 24 capsules) iii. 5 (five) nos. of strips of Nitrazepam Tablets (each strip containing 50tablets) iv. 126 (one hundred twenty six) nos. of codilus-T cough syrup, and v. 127 (one hundred twenty seven) nos. of RBREXX cough syrup, Page No.# 3/6 6. During the interrogation, the arrested accused person also revealed that the said narcotic substances were procured by him from one Nur Jamal and Ansharul Islam (the present petitioner). 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and has been languishing behind the bars for last 97 days. 8. He has also submitted that the petitioner is an employee of Adarsha Drug Distributor Pharmacy, which belongs to Nur Jamal, who is the owner of the said pharmacy and he is to supply the medicines to the customers as per the direction of his employer, Nur Jamal. He further submits that noth- ing was recovered from his possession. 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the peti- tioner has been arrested merely on the basis of statement of the co- accused and apart from the said statement of co-accused, there is no ma- terial on record to implicate him. He submits that in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in (2021) 4 SCC 1, the statement of co-accused is not admissi- ble as evidence. He, therefore, prays for allowing the petitioner to go on bail. 10. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehe- mently opposed the grant of bail to the present petitioner on the ground that the contraband involved in this case is of commercial quantity and therefore, embargo of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985 is applicable to this case. 11. He also submits that there are materials in the case file to indicate that it was the petitioner along with Nur Jamal, who are the main supplier of seized drugs, which were recovered from the house of the co-accused. Page No.# 4/6 12. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the co-accused Nur Jamal, who has employed of the present petitioner is the owner of a license firm. 13. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the sides and have perused the materials on record including the case diary of Nagaon P.S. Case No.14/2025. 14. On perusal of the materials on report, including the case diary of Nagaon P.S. Case No.14/2025, it appears that the contraband seized in this case were recovered from the possession of the co-accused Abu Bakkr Siddique and nothing was recovered from the possession of the present petitioner. 15. It also appears that the present petitioner was implicated on the basis of the statement of the co-accused, which was recorded during the course of the investigation. However, apart from the statement of co-accused Abu Bakkr Siddique, till date there is no other material to link the present peti- tioner with the contraband seized in connection with this case. 16. It is no longer res integra that the statement of co-accused is not admissi- ble as evidence in a case involving offence under NDPS Act. Though, the statement of a co-accused recorded during the course of the investigation may provide a lead to the Investigating Officer to collect necessary evi- dence for implicating the accused who has been implicated in the state- ment of the co-accused. However, if the Investigating Officer fails to col- lect such evidence, the statement of co-accused in itself would not help the prosecution side to implicate such an accused in this case. 17. In the instant case, on perusal of the case diary, it appears that even after 97 days of detention of the present petitioner, the Investigating Officer has not been able to collect any other material, apart from the statement Page No.# 5/6 of the accused Abu Bakkr Siddique, to link the present petitioner with the contraband which has been recovered in the instant case. 18. In view of above, this Court holds that for the limited purpose of consider- ation of the instant bail application, at this stage, there are reasonable grounds to hold that the petitioner is not guilty in respect of the offence alleged in this case, i.e., in respect of the contraband recovered in this case. There is also no material on record to show that the present peti- tioner has any criminal antecedent. 19. Therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioner has been able to overcome the embargo of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985 in this case. 20. In view of the above, the petitioner, namely, Ansharul Islam, is allowed to go on bail of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two sureties of like amount (one of whom should be a government servant and resid- ing within the State of Assam) subject to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, NDPS, Nagaon with the following conditions: i. That the petitioner shall cooperate in the investigation of Nagaon P.S. Case No.14/2025, which is pending in the Court of the learned Special Judge, NDPS, Nagaon; ii. That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any induce- ment, 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 Investigating Officer; iii. That the petitioner shall provide his contact details including photo- copies of his Aadhar Card or Driving License or PAN Card, Mobile Number, and other contact details before the Court of the learned Special Judge, NDPS, Nagaon; Page No.# 6/6 iv. That the petitioner 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 petitioner shall submit his leave ad- dress and contact details during such leave before the Trial Court; v. That the petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail; vi. That any violation of the above conditions shall be a good ground for the Trial Court to get the petitioner arrested and commit him to custody. 21. With the above observation, this bail application is accordingly, disposed of. 22. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant