Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010038062025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./578/2025 MD NAZIM UDDIN S/O LATE ABDUL KHALIQUE VILL- SURJADAS P.S. AND P.O.KARIMGNAJ, DIST. KARIMGANJ, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R CHOUDHURY, K MAINUDDIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI ORDER 30.04.2025 Heard Mr. H.R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Das, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This is an application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for granting regular Page No.# 2/7 bail to the petitioner, i.e. Md. Nazim Uddin, who has been arrested on 25.03.2022 in connection with Special NDPS Case No. 50/2022 pending in the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Sribhumi arising out of Karimganj P.S. Case No. 211/2022 under Section 22(c) of NDPS Act, 1985. 3. The facts of the case is that on 25.03.2022, the Officer-in-charge of Karimganj Police Station received an FIR from the informant, who is the In- charge Police Official, Kaliganj Police Station, Karimganj to the effect that on 24.03.2022, the informant received an information that large quantity of Narcotic Drugs shall be carried towards Kaliganj side by one drug peddler belonging to Kaliganj area who was coming by a magic truck and was likely to deliver the consignment to other peddler before 2:00 pm on that date. Accordingly, a Police team was sent to the spot and after they reached, they apprehended the petitioner and upon searching, Narcotic Drugs have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner, which were seized and handed over to the ASI, Karimganj Police Station. Thereafter, a case was registered. Accordingly, the instant bail application. 4. Mr. H.R. Choudhury, 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. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor 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 Page No.# 3/7 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 materials available on record. 7. The primary ground urged in this bail application is as regard non- compliance of the Constitutional and Fundamental Right of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 21 and 22(1) of the Constitution of India. Apt to refer to Article 21 and 22(1) of the Constitution of India, which reads as hereunder:- “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 Crpc) Ref: Karimganj P.S case No.- 211/2022, U/S-22(c) NDPS Act To 1. Najim Uddin (30 Years) Page No.# 4/7 S/o Lt. Abdul Khalique Vill- Surja Das (Kaliganj) P.S & dist- Karimganj I would like to inform you that you have been arrested in connection with the above referred case and will be forwarded to the Hon’ble court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karimganj on 25.03.2022. Bona Of Karimganj P.S Dist – Karimganj Date- 25.03.2022 Officer-in-charge Karimganj Police Station” 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 I. Name and particulars of Person Arrested: 1. Najim Uddin (30 Years) S/o Lt. Abdul Khalique Vill- Surja Das (Kaliganj) P.S & dist- Karimganj U/S 22(c)/25/29 NDPS Act, 1985 2. Circumstances/P.S Case/GDE Referenced of Arrest: Karimganj P.S. case No- 211/2022, U/S- 22(c) NDPS Act 3. Place of arrest : Karimganj P.S 4. Date and time of arrest : 25/03/2022, at 2.35 PM 5. Injuries Present at the time of Arrest (If yes, make inspection Memo of Reverse:As per medical Report 6. Signature and name of Relative/Witness of Arrest: (At least one) : Page No.# 5/7 ……..Illegible 7. Signature of Arrestee Person : ………Illegible 8. Signature & full name of Arresting Officer: S.I. Palash Bora, Of Karimganj P.S Bona 25.03.2021 Officer-in-Incharge Karimganj Police Station” 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 I. Police Station, Karimganj P.S Illegible….Petition (Original) No. 829 of 1986 and 592 of 1991 2. Case reference: Karimganj P.S. Case No.211/2022, U/S 22(c) NDPS Act 3. Name And Address of Accused: 1. Najim Uddin (30 Years) S/o Lt. Abdul Khalique Vill- Surja Das (Kaliganj) P.S & dist- Karimganj 4. Wound in body at the time of medical examination: As per Medical Report 5. Name & add of Police Officer: SI Palash Bora, of Karimganj P.S. Effecting Arres 6. Name & designation of M.O. on duty: As per Medical Rpt. Page No.# 6/7 7. Signature of arrestee : ………Illegible 8. Signature of Police Officer who escort: SIGNATURE OF I/O Bona 25.03.2021 Officer-in-Incharge Karimganj Police Station” 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. 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 SC 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 Page No.# 7/7 the power of this Court to grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, further detention of the petitioner in the custody is totally unjustified. 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 learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sribhumi under the conditions: - (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