Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010020802026 2026:GAU-AS:2919 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./353/2026 CHANOWAR HUSSAIN S/O- CHORAHAB ALI VILL- GANABINYA, P.S.-ABHAYAPURI,DIST- BONGAIGAON, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R ALI, N PERVIN,MR. MUSTAFA HUSSAIN,MR H A AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 25.02.2026 Heard Mr. R. Ali, learned counsel for the accused-applicant. Also heard Mr. K. Baishya, learned Addl. P.P., representing the State. 2. This is an application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 praying for granting bail to the accused-applicant in connection with NDPS Case No. 308/2025 (arising out of Page No.# 2/3 Basistha P.S. Case No. 313/2025), registered under Sections 21(C)/25/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985. 3. An FIR was lodged on 04.06.2025, alleging that on receipt of information from a confidential source by the Officer In-charge, Basistha Police Station, the police team apprehended one Maruti Suzuki Car bearing Registration No. AS-01-LC-1253, which was coming towards Lakhra. It was alleged that on intercepting the vehicle, the driver and handyman were apprehended and while being questioned, they revealed that a cotton bag was hidden beneath the seat. On search of the bag, police recovered 22 soap boxes containing suspected Heroin, amounting to 295.46 grams. 4. On receipt of the FIR, the police registered Basistha P.S. Case No. 313/2025, under the aforementioned Sections against the accused-applicant. 5. On completion of the investigation, the police filed Charge-sheet, vide Charge- sheet No. 394/2025 dated 11.09.2025 against the accused persons, including the accused-applicant. 6. The learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the accused-applicant is behind the bar for the last 267 days and the alleged seizure of Heroin is marginally higher than the commercial quantity. He submits that since the accused-applicant has already spent considerable time behind the bar and the amount seized being little bit more than the commercial quantity, at this stage, his further detention may not be required and therefore, he should be released on bail. 7. The learned Addl. P.P., on the other hand, opposes the bail application stating that the rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act will be applicable in the instant case. Therefore, at this stage, the accused-applicant should not be granted bail. 8. The TCR of the instant case has been produced before this Court and the same has been perused. 9. On perusal of the records produced before this Court, including the Charge-sheet, Page No.# 3/3 it is revealed that the contraband materials which was recovered and seized amounts to 295.46 grams without the soap boxes and it is also seen that there are records and statements that the accused persons are habitual offenders and had been involved in drug trade for a long time. 10. Taking into account the whole aspect of the matter in it’s entirety and following the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, this Court is not of the considered opinion that the accused-applicant should be granted bail at this stage. Accordingly, the instant bail application is rejected. JUDGE Comparing Assistant