Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010146912026 2026:GAU-AS:11341 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2079/2026 DIPANKAR SARKAR S/O LATE SITENDRA SARKAR, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE JAKHLIBIL PATHAR, P.O. BARPETA ROAD, P.S. GOBARDHANA, DISTRICT BAKSA, BTR, ASSAM, PIN 781315 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM. 2:DEBOJIT BAISHNAB SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE BARPETA ROAD POLICE STATION RESIDENT OF BARPETA ROAD P.S. BARPETA ROAD, P.O. BARPETA ROAD PIN 781315, DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S NATH, R SAHA,MR S DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 12.08.2026 Heard Mr. S. Nath, learned counsel for the accused and also heard Mr. D.P. Page No.# 2/4 Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State respondent. 2. This application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, is preferred by the accused, namely, Dipankar Sarkar, who has been languishing in jail hazot since 20.04.2026, in connection with Barpeta Road P.S. Case No.36/2026, corresponding to Special NDPS Case No.38/2026, pending before the Court of learned Special Judge, Barpeta, under Section 22(c) of the NDPS Act, for grant of bail. 3. It is to be noted here that the aforementioned case has been registered on the basis of one FIR, lodged by S.I. Debajit Baishnab, S.I. of Police, Barpeta Road P.S., on 20.04.2026. The essence of allegation in the FIR is that the petitioner is found in possession of total 4(four) similar transparent packets and each packet containing 25 Nos. of identical bottles, marked as Triprolidine Hydrochloride and codeine phosphate Phensedyl cough syrup on 19.04.2026, at about 8:30 p.m., near BSNL office, Barpeta Road. 4. Mr. Nath, learned counsel for the accused submits that the accused has the licence to deal with the cough syrup and on 19.04.2026, at about 8:30 p.m., he was carrying the cough syrup in the vehicle and since the accused has the licence to sell the seized contraband substances recovered from his possession, the offence under Section 22(c) of the NDPS Act is not made out and that the accused will appear before the learned Trial Court on each and every date and therefore, it is contended to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, has vehemently opposed the petition. He submits that after completion of investigation, the I.O. has filed charge-sheet against the accused and charge has been framed against the accused under Section 22(c) of the NDPS Act on 10.08.2026 and now the case is pending for examination of the witnesses. He also submits that the contraband Page No.# 3/4 substances, allegedly recovered from the possession of the accused, is of commercial quantity and as such, the accused has to satisfy the twin requirement of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and the accused here in this case has failed to satisfy the same and therefore, he has contended to dismiss the petition. 6. To a pointed query to Mr. Nath, learned counsel for the accused, as to how he would satisfy the twin requirement of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, since the contraband substance seized in this case is of commercial quantity, Mr. Nath submits that he will satisfy the same during the course of trial. 7. Having heard the submission of learned counsel for both the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and also perused the scanned copy of the record received from the learned Trial Court. 8. It appears that the accused was arrested on 20.04.2026, and since then he has been languishing in jail hazot. Further, it appears that the investigation of this case has been completed and the I.O. has laid charge-sheet and charge was framed against the accused under Section 22(c) of the NDPS Act. It also appears from the record that 4(four) similar transparent packets, each packet containing 25 nos. of identical bottles marked as Triprolidine Hydrochloride and codeine phosphate Phensedyl cough syrup was recovered from the possession of the accused and the net weight of cough syrup containing Codeine phosphate in 100 bottles is 123.84 x 100 = 12384 gm, which is indisputably of commercial quantity and as such, there is a requirement of satisfying the twin condition of Section 37 of the NDPS Act that he is not guilty of the offence and that he will not commit any offence while on bail. 9. 9. It is to be noted here that, in the case of Union of India vs. Ajay Kumar Singh @ Pappu, in Criminal Appeal No.952 of 2023 [Arising out of SLP (CRL.) No. 2351 OF 2023], decided on 28th March, 2023, Hon’ble Supreme Court, while setting aside the order of granting bail by the Allahabad High Court, to the accused involving in commercial quantity of contraband substance, has held as Page No.# 4/4 under:- “In view of the above provisions, it is implicit that no person accused of an offence involving trade in commercial quantity of narcotics is liable to be released on bail unless the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such an offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.” 10. In the instant case, this Court fails to derive satisfaction from the materials placed on record and also from the submission of the learned counsel for the accused, regarding satisfying of twin requirement of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. 11. Moreover, the offence is serious in nature and trial is going on and misusing of liberty granted to the accused at this stage cannot be ruled out, if he is enlarged on bail at this stage. 12. Under the given facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that this is not a fit case where the privilege of bail can be granted to the accused and accordingly, the same stands dismissed. 13. Case diary be returned. Comparing Assistant Sd/- Robin Phukan JUDGE