Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010007752026 2026:GAU-AS:1600 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./162/2026 ABDUL MAZID S/O LATE HARUN RASHID KAFOIMARI, R/O VILL. KAFOIMARI, R/O VIL. KAOIMARI, P.S. JURIA, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN 782124 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S C BISWAS, B KALITA,MS. S. CHANDA,MR. P S BISWAS,MS. U NANDA,MR. K DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 06.02.2026 Heard Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Baishya, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State. Page No.# 2/4 2. This application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the accused applicant, namely, Abdul Mazid, praying for grant of bail in connection with NDPS Case No. 62/2025, pending before the learned District and Sessions Judge, Cachar, Silchar arising out of Silchar P.S Case No. 564/2025, registered under Sections 21(b)/25/29 of NDPS Act, 1985. 3. An FIR was lodged on 28.05.2025 before the Officer-in-Charge of Silchar Police Station alleging that on receipt of an information, a police team intercepted one e-rickshaw bearing registration No.AS-11-FC-5519 and following the due procedure when the e-rickshaw was searched, police found one Grey School Bag inside which 13 Nos. of Soap Boxes of different colours were found wherein total 147 gms of suspected heroin was recovered. 4. On completion of the investigation, the police filed charge-sheet vide Charge-sheet No.509/2025 dated 12.07.2025. 5. The accused applicant was arrested on 29.05.2025 and since then for the last 261 days, he is behind the bars. 6. The learned counsel for the accused applicant submits that the accused applicant was the passenger of the e-rickshaw and he did not have any knowledge about the School bag that was carried by the other persons who were travelling in the e-rickshaw. 7. The learned counsel for the accused applicant submits that the accused applicant was arrested only on mere suspicion and the aforesaid contraband Page No.# 3/4 material that has been seized by the police did not belong to him and he was unaware of the same. 8. The learned counsel for the accused applicant further submits that the police has already completed investigation and accordingly, charge-sheet has already been filed. Since he has already spent more than 261 days behind the bars, taking into consideration his long detention, his further custodial detention in the instant case may not be required, therefore, the accused applicant should be allowed to go on bail. 9. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State submits that the contraband substance was recovered from his e-rickshaw and therefore, it cannot be said that the accused applicant was unaware of carrying of such contraband material in his e-rickshaw. Therefore, he submits that at this stage, the accused applicant should not be granted bail. 10. This Court has heard the submissions made by the respective counsel as well as gone through the materials brought before this Court. 11. On considering the detention of the accused applicant behind the bars and since the charge-sheet has already been filed, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case wherein, the accused applicant should be granted the privilege of regular bail. 12. After taking into account the entire facts, including the fact that the accused applicant has already spent the last 261 days in judicial custody, this Page No.# 4/4 Court is of the opinion that the above-named accused applicant be allowed to go on bail on furnishing of a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) only with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of the Court of the learned Special Judge (NDPS), Cachar with following conditions: (1) That the accused applicant shall co-operate with the Investigation and make himself available as and when required by the Investigating Officer; (ii) That the accused applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any Inducement, threat or promise to any person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts of the case before the Investigating Officer; (iii) That the accused applicant shall not hamper or tamper with evidence. 13. In view of the aforesaid, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant