Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010047132025 2025:GAU-AS:2788 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./645/2025 NAZRUL ALI @ NAZRUL ALI SHEIKH S/O MD. KHALEK ALI R/O VILL-CHAMOTA P.S. SONAPUR DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. A. MEDHI, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 17.03.2025 Heard Ms. A. Medhi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. Page No.# 2/3 This is an application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of bail to the accused/petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with Sonapur P.S. Case No. 28/2025, under Sections 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act. Case Diary has been received. Perused the same. Heard both sides. It is submitted by Ms. Medhi, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the present accused/petitioner is innocent and he is no way connected in the alleged offence. Nothing has been seized from the possession of the accused/petitioner and he got arrested in connection with this case only on the basis of the statement made by the co-accused, which is not admissible in the eye of law. Further she submitted that the quantity of the recovered alleged contraband is only 1.178 Kgs, which can be considered to be small quantity. She also submitted that the accused is behind the bar since 27.02.2025 and thus the I.O. got sufficient time for his custodial interrogation. Mr. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submitted in this regard that it is a fact that the contraband was recovered from the possession of the co-accused one Ear Ali, but from the materials available in the Case Diary, it is seen that the present petitioner is the main supplier who used to supply the contraband to the F.I.R. named accused person as well as other persons and the investigation is still under process and hence, he raised objection and submitted that it is not at all a fit case to allow the accused/petitioner to go on bail at this stage. He further submitted that the accused/petitioner has been behind the bar for only 18 days and the investigation is still under progress and hence, some other materials may come out during the investigation. Page No.# 3/3 Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for both sides and also considering the materials available in the Case Diary, I find that further custodial interrogation of the present accused/petitioner may be necessary to unearth some more facts of the case and therefore, I do not find it justified to allow the accused to go on bail at this stage and accordingly, the present bail application stands rejected. In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant