Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010008982026 2026:GAU-AS:4227 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./227/2026 MICHAEL LALREMROUT AND ANR SON OF- LAMREIKALRESIDENT OF VILL.- CHURACHANDPUR, P.O.- SAIKAT, P.S.- CHURACHANDPUR, DISTRICTCHURACHANDPUR, MANIPUR. PIN-795117 2: MARINA NEITINPHAL WIFE OF- MICHAEL LALREMROUT. BOTH ARE RESIDENT OF VILL.- CHURACHANDPUR P.O.- SAIKAT P.S.- CHURACHANDPUR DISTRICTCHURACHANDPUR MANIPUR. PIN-795117 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. L R MAZUMDER, MR. A ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER 20.03.2026 Heard Mr. L.R. Mazumder, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned APP for the State. 2. This application has been filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, praying for granting bail to the petitioners, in connection with Dholai PS Case No. 98/2025 dated 19.07.2025, corresponding to GR No.1260/2025, under Section 21(c)/25/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 which culminated in NDPS Case no 83/2025 in the Court of the learned Special Judge, Cachar, Silchar. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the arrest memo does not bear the signatures of any independent witness. It is further contended that no notice, as mandated under Section 48 of the BNSS, was served upon any family member or friend of the petitioners after they were taken into custody. According to the learned counsel, the statutory safeguards relating to arrest, which are intended to afford an accused a fair opportunity to defend himself at the stage of remand, have been violated in the present case, as no relative or friend of the petitioners was informed of their arrest. It is therefore argued that such non-compliance amounts to a violation of the petitioners’ fundamental rights under Articles 21 and 22(1) of the Constitution of India, rendering their continued custody unconstitutional and entitling them to bail. 4. The learned APP, upon perusal of the trial court records, has submitted Page No.# 3/5 that there exists material indicating that communication was sent to the concerned police station having jurisdiction over the residential area of the petitioners. However, it is also noted that there is no reply or proof of delivery of notices under Section 48 to any family member or friend of the petitioners. The learned APP further submits that the trial court records do not reflect the signatures of any independent witness on the arrest memo. It is contended that, since the quantity of contraband recovered from the petitioners is of commercial quantity, the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would be attracted. 5. Upon consideration of the trial court records as well as the materials annexed to the bail petition, this Court finds that there is nothing to indicate that notice under Section 48 was served upon any family member or friend nominated by the petitioners. In such circumstances, the Court cannot ignore the contention that the petitioners’ rights under Article 22(1) of the Constitution have been violated. Where such fundamental rights are found to have been infringed, the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act would not operate to preclude the grant of bail. 6. In view of the foregoing, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioners are entitled to the privilege of bail in connection with Dholai PS Case No. 98 of 2025, culminating in NDPS Case No. 83 of 2025 pending before the Court of the Special Judge, Cachar, Silchar. 7. This Court notices that the petitioner has proclaimed himself to be a resident of a State which is beyond the jurisdiction of the Learned Court which Page No.# 4/5 has taken up the case of the petitioner for Trial,. In the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is of the view that strict conditions of releasing the petitioner on bail are required to be imposed to ensure his participation in Trial l. This court therefore directs that the petitioners be released on bail on furnishing bonds of Rs 1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh only) each with two suitable sureties of the like amount each, at least one of who, in each case shall be a government servant serving either with the Government of Assam or with the Central Government and at least one who should have immovable property, to the satisfaction of the Learned Special Judge, Cachar, Silchar, under the following conditions. i) The petitioner shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction the Learned Special Judge, Cachar, Silchar without prior written permission; ii) The petitioner shall not hamper and tamper with the evidence of the case; iii) The petitioner 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; iv) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any (if not already surrendered) before the Learned Special Judge, Cachar, Silchar; v) The petitioner shall not try to contact any of the witnesses by any mode including telephone, social media etc; Page No.# 5/5 vi) The petitioner shall furnish the present residential address with proof to the Learned Special Judge, Cachar, Silchar and shall not change the said residence without prior permission of the Learned Special Judge, Cachar, Silchar. The Learned Special Judge, Cachar, Silchar shall be at liberty to have the same verified in such manner as may be deemed fit; vii) The petitioner shall appear before the Learned Special Judge, Cachar, Silchar as and when required to do so; viii) The Learned Special Judge, Cachar, Silchar shall be at liberty to impose such other conditions or conditions as may be deemed necessary to ensure the participation of the petitioner in the investigation; ix) The petitioner shall not engage in any illegal activity of similar nature in the future; x) The prosecution shall be at liberty to bring any violation of the conditions imposed to the notice of the competent court and request for a recall/cancellation of bail. 8. The bail petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant