Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010031722025 2025:GAU-AS:4998 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/397/2025 MD AKRAMUL ISLAM @ MANIK C/O EUNUS ALI R/O KAKRIPARA PT.II, MANKACHAR DHUBRI, ASSAM-783131 PH. 8761956197 TEMPORARY ADDRESS- MAZUMDAR SHAW MEDICAL CENTRE, NARAYANA HEALTH CITY, 258/A, BOMMASANDRA INDUSTRIAL AREA, ANEKAL TALUK HOSUR ROAD, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA-560099 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B D KONWAR SR. ADV., MRS J M KONWAR,MS S JAIN,MS M ZOMUANPUII,MR J SINGH Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, SC, NCB Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 25.04.2025 1. Heard learned Senior Counsel Mr. B.D.Konwar assisted by learned counsel Mrs. J.M.Konwar for the petitioner Md. Akramul Islam @ Manik who has filed this application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 with prayer for pre-arrest bail as he is apprehending arrest in connection with NDPS Case No. 203/2022 arising out of Panbazar PS Case No. 163/2022 under Sections 21(C)/29 of the NDPS Act. 2. Learned Addl.Public Prosecutor Mr. P.S.Lahkar is present for the respondent State. 3. The FIR unfolds that on 21.06.2022 at about 6.30 pm, an information was received that two vehicles transporting consignment from Jorabat side were about to enter into Panbazar area. A GD entry was registered and Naka checking was held near Handique Girls College at Dighalipukhuri. The two vehicles viz. one black Scorpio bearing Registration No. AS01-DV1033 and a Tata Harrier vehicle without a registration number was intercepted and searched. The Tata Harrier vehicle was driven by Md.Safique. On searching the said vehicle, 14 packets wrapped with yellow coloured tape containing a total of 133 blue coloured small packets, each packet containing 200 orange-coloured tablets marked as ‘WY’ were recovered from an artificial deck below the mat of the dickey of the car. The total number of WY tablets were 26,600 and seized from the vehicle. The vehicle was driven by Md. Safique and the occupant was Page No.# 3/5 Md. Irfan Khan and they were forwarded to custody. The other vehicle was driven by Md. Anowar Hussain and the occupant was Md. Amir Hussain who was also involved in the transportation of the contraband. These tablets were seized and investigation commenced. Charge sheet was laid against the accused person but final charge sheet was not submitted. 4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has not been named in the FIR nor charge sheet has been laid against him. While submitting charge sheet, name of one Manik has surfaced relating to mobile No. 6003992280. This SIM card was seized in connection with this case along with a mobile hand set of Realme model. It is submitted that not a single witness has named the present petitioner. Statements were recorded under Section 161 CrPC. It is further submitted that although the petitioner’s name has surfaced, he is not linked with this case. The petitioner is apprehending arrest as the police are searching for him. 5. It is further submitted that one of the co-accused who has a pending murder trial in connection with Sessions Case No.195/2025 has implicated that the aforementioned mobile phone belongs to the petitioner. It is submitted that the co-accused Amir Hussain’s statement is not reliable as his conduct clearly reveals that he is not a reliable person as he is booked in a murder case. 6. It is further submitted that the petitioner has two children one daughter and a son who are suffering from thelassemia. The petitioner remains outside the State for treatment of his children. It is submitted that if he is forwarded to custody, his ailing children will suffer immensely. Annexure-1 series are the documents to substantiate that the petitioner’s children are suffering from Thelassemia. It is further submitted that the petitioner himself is also ailing and Page No.# 4/5 Anneuxure-1 series are some of the documents relating to the petitioner’s ailment. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is willing to co-operate with the investigation and he may be given interim protection to appear before the I.O.and co-operate with the investigation. 7. On the contrary, learned Addl.Public Prosecutor has raised serious objection. It is submitted that no interim order is required to be passed as the scanned copies of the trial court records along with the scanned copies of the Case Diary is available. This is an open and shut case. There are incriminating materials and call records detail shows petitioner’s complicity. Petitioner was in constant touch with the accused person who was forwarded to custody. Co- accused Amir Hussain was interrogated in jail. His statement cannot be written off as he is facing trial in a murder case. 8. The learned trial court has relied on the decision of a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Raja Ali –vs- State of Assam wherein vide order dated 10.03.2025 passed in AB No. 383/2025 it was observed in paragraph 8 that: “8. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has in support of his submissions cited a ruling of the Apex Court in the case of “The State of Haryana Vs. Samarth Kumar” (order dated 20th July 2022, [in Criminal Appeal No. 1006/2022] (arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 6683/2021, wherein, the Apex Court has observed as follows:- “8. In cases of this nature, the respondents may be able to take advantage of the decision in Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nade(supra), perhaps at the time of arguing the regular bail application or at the time of final hearing after conclusion of the trial.” To grant anticipatory bail in a case of this nature is not really warranted. Therefore, we are of the view that the High Court fell into an error in granting anticipatory bail Page No.# 5/5 to the respondents.” 9. I have also scrutinized the Case Dairy. 10. Indeed there are incriminating materials in the Case Diary against the petitioner. Supplementary Charge Sheet is yet to be submitted. It appears that investigation and trial may be adversely affected if the petitioner is insulated by an order of anticipatory bail. 11. Petitioner is willing to co-operate with the investigation. If he has no link with the phone and the mobile number mentioned above, seized in connection with this case, his apprehension of arrest is unwarranted. 12. Considering the gravity of the offence, the accused is not entitled to anticipatory bail. After considering the submission with circumspection, at this juncture, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected. 13. Send back the Case Dairy. JUDGE Comparing Assistant