Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010037922026 2026:GAU-AS:4315 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./703/2026 PRADIP KAR S/O LATE DHIRENDRA KAR, R/O NORTH BRAJPUR, P.O. BRAJPUR, P.S. BISHALGARH, PIN 799102, SEPAHIJALA, TRIPURA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M R SODIAL, MUFIDUL ISLAM,MS S Z HAYAT,R ALI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER Date : 25-03-2026 Heard Ms. S. Z. Hayat, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Baishya, learned Additional PP for the State. 2. Invoking Section 483 BNSS, 2023 the petitioner herein, Pradip Kar, is seeking regular bail in connection with NDPS Case no. 87/2025 arising out of Silchar PS case no. 811/2025. 3. The petitioner is in custody after his arrest on 13.08.2025. 4. The allegations in the FIR was that an information was received about suspected drug peddler coming in an Ertiga vehicle from Tripura towards Lumding-Silchar road to deliver contraband in Cahcar district, whereupon GDE No. 192 was made and search operation was conducted. In the afternoon, one Ertiga vehicle bearing registration No. AS11CD6925 suspected to be fake was stopped and the driver identified as Pradeep Kar was searched and inside the vehicle 61 plastic packets were found containing 362.02 kgs including packing of suspected Ganja. 5. Subsequently, after completion of investigation, chargesheet was submitted against the accused person and 10 witnesses are listed in the chargesheet. Charge has also been framed and the case is at the stage of prosecution evidence and so far PW-1 has been examined and PW-2 examined in part. The learned counsel submits that while notice under Section 47 BNSS is in order, but notice under Section 48 BNSS has not been given properly. Page No.# 3/4 6. The scanned TCR has been received. 7. The prosecution submits that the accused was produced on 11.08.2025 as revealed by the endorsement made by the Magistrate. 8. I have perused the notice under Section 47 BNSS and the same narrates the grounds of arrest in reasonable detail. The notice under section 48 BNSS is also available, and the same also is in reasonable detail, narrating the grounds of arrest pertaining to the accused person. The said notice was sent by wireless communication to the concerned police station to be furnished to the concerned family member and it was received by one J. Singha. Therefore, I am of the considered view that there are no infirmities in the notices under section 47 and 48 BNSS. 9. Considering that the penal provision pertaining to commercial quantity of suspected ganja has been given, the rigours of section 37 NDPS Act is to be decided. For this purpose, I have perused the relevant portion of the scanned report. 2 (two) seizure witnesses were stated to be present at the time of the alleged seizure of the contraband and both the seizure witnesses in their statements have supported about their seizure of large quantity of ganja. 10. It is submitted by the prosecution that FSL report has returned positive finding regarding cannabis Ganja. 11. In view of the aforesaid materials, including the framing of charge against the petitioner, it is not possible to hold that the test of Section 37 of the Act is passed in favour of the accused, so as to overcome the statutory bar upon granting of bail. Page No.# 4/4 12. In the said facts and circumstances, at this stage, this Court would be statutorily barred from granting bail to the accused and accordingly, the bail petition stands rejected, at this stage. 13. It is hoped that the learned Trial Court would endeavour to expeditiously conduct and complete the remaining trial, considering the fact that the accused is in under trial detention. JUDGE Comparing Assistant