Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010058032025 2025:GAU-AS:3888 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./831/2025 AJAY GOYARI S/O SHRI BHABEN GAYARI VILL-SANTIPUR NIREN BORO PATH, P.O. GORCHUK P.S. GARCHUK DIST. KAMRUP (METRO), ASSAM-781035 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : RAJU DEURI, MR. S K DEORI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 02-04-2025 Heard Mr. S.K. Deori, the learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. K.K. Das, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the Page No.# 2/3 State respondent. 2. This is an application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, with prayer for bail as the petitioner is behind bars since 02.02.2025 in connection with Garchuk P.S. Case No. 35/2025 u/s 20(b)(ii)(B) NDPS Act, 1985, GDE. No. 35/2025 dated 03.02.2025 and G.R. No. 591/2025. 3. Case Diary is received. Perused the same. Heard both sides. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Deori, the learned counsel for the petitioner that since 03.02.2025 the petitioner is in custody and thus he has completed 59 days in custody but till date the Investigating Officer could not file their charge-sheet. Further he submitted that the quantity of the alleged recovery was 2 kg 836 gram cannabis which is considered intermediate quantity and hence the rigour of Section 37 does not attract in this case. However, he is ready and willing to co-operate with the Investigating Office in further investigation of the case, if he is granted the privilege of bail. 5. Mr. Das, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted in this regard that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the present petitioner. However, the Investigating Officer could not collect the FSL till date and thus there may not be any probability of filing charge-sheet within 2/3 days. 6. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides, without going into the merit of case and also considering the length of detention i.e. 59 days already undergone by the accused/petitioner, I find that further custodial interrogation may not be necessary for further investigation of the case. Accordingly, I find it is a fit case to enlarge the accused/petitioner on bail. 7. Accordingly, the accused/petitioner be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only with one surety of like amount Page No.# 3/3 to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, Kamrup (M). The accused/petitioner, namely Ajay Goyari, be enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threaten or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and (iii) that the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Special Judge, Kamrup (M) without prior permission. The Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant