Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010010812026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./232/2026 NARINDER SINGH S/O LATE SUKHIJDER SINGH R/O SANGRUR, UPPLI ROAD, P.S. SANGRUR DIST. SANGRUR, DIST. SANGRUR, PUNJAB. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R A CHOUDHURY, S NAZNIN,MR. I U CHOWDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER Date : 19-02-2026 Heard Mr. H.R.A Choudhury, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Ms. S. Naznin, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. P.P appearing for the State. Today the matter was taken up for production of the CD for the verification as to Page No.# 2/4 whether the notice purportedly to have been served under section 47 & 48 of the BNSS complied the requirement of law. The CD has been produced by the learned Addl. P.P which shows that there is a third page attached to the section 47 notice. Today, when the CD has been produced, the learned Addl. P.P has drawn our attention to the 3rd page contained in the notice u/s 47, BNSS purportedly served upon the petitioner which contained the signature of the petitioner. A perusal of the certified copy obtained by the petitioner from the record of the learned Trial Court does not reflect that there is a 3rd page in the record of the Trial Court. The absence of the 3rd page of the section 47 notice in the certified copy and the presence of the same in the CD would require a consideration of the appropriate prosecuting authority. Be that as it may, it is the admitted position that the notice u/s 48 of the BNSS had never served upon any family, friend or relatives of the petitioner. There is no such record of service of notice upon the family, friend or relative of the petitioner by the arresting authority. The learned Addl. P.P has submitted that the said information was send to the family of the petitioner through a W.T message routed through Officer-in-Charge Sangrur district, Punjab. There is no reflection in the CD that any appropriate measure taken by the Investigating Authority to ensure that the family, friend or relatives of the petitioner had been informed 2 hours prior to production before the learned Magistrate to intimate the ground of arrest as required u/s 48 of the BNSS. The learned Addl. P.P has submitted that the very quantity of the narcotic recovered from the petitioner is a reason enough to deny the grant of privilege of bail, more so, it is not in dispute that he was served u/s 47 notice and enough effort were made by the Investigating Authority to inform the family of the petitioner about the arrest and ground of arrest of the petitioner by resorting to sending the same by W.T message to the concerned Police Station. It is also submitted by the learned Addl. P.P that the very quantity recovered from the petitioner is an indicative of his involvement to drugs trafficking of NDPS and Page No.# 3/4 therefore, he may not be enlarged on bail. In the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the arrest and the detention of the petitioner had been rendered illegal and cannot be sustained in law. In such circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail. Keeping in view the fact that the allegation of the petitioner is recovery of opium, and the petitioner has proclaimed himself to be a resident of outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Investigating Authority and the Trial Court, if the matter is send up for trial, this Court is of the view that the petitioner can be granted the privilege of bail in connection with the Rangia P.S Case No. 254/2025 registered u/s 17(C)/25/29 of NDPS Act on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of the like amount, out of which, one of the sureties should be a Government employee and at least one having landed property, to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, Kamrup, Rangia, Assam. The direction for bail is further subject to the conditions that the petitioner; (a) shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of learned Special Judge, Kamrup Rangia, Assam without prior written permission till disposal of the case; (b) shall regularly attend the Trial Court and the I.O to co-operate for early disposal of the case; and (c) 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court. The learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to impose such other condition as may be necessary. The observation made by the Court is for the purpose of this bail application only, not on merits of the case. Violation or breach of any condition(s) shall render cancellation of bail. The bail application is disposed of accordingly. A copy of this order would be supplied to Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. P.P requesting him to forward the same to the Director of Prosecution, Assam to bring to the notice of the defect which has been apparently found in the notice issued under section 47 & 48, more particularly in this case, when the CD contains the added page Page No.# 4/4 but the certified copy apparently do not have the 3rd page of the section 47 notice. JUDGE Comparing Assistant