Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010109482026 2026:GAU-AS:7754 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1446/2026 MUSHARAF HUSSAIN S/O- DULU MIYA VILL THEKAGAON, PS BARPETA, DIST. BARPETA ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : S K PODDAR, R MANDAL,MR. R GHOSH,MS. N PODDAR,MR. C SHARMA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, :: BEFORE :: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA O R D E R 04.06.2026 Heard the learned counsel Mr. S.K. Poddar appearing for the petitioner. I have also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam. Page No.# 2/3 2. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 whereby the petitioner Musharaf Hussain has prayed for releasing him on bail after he was arrested in connection with Barpeta P.S. Case No.89/2026 under Sections 21(b)/22(b) of NDPS Act, 1985. 3. The petitioner was arrested on 27.03.2026 and the charge sheet has been filed on 26.05.2026. 4. The petitioner submits that the charge sheet was filed on the 61st day of his detention. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court that was delivered in Enforcement Directorate, Government of India v. Kapil Wadhawan & Anr. Etc., reported in 2023 Supreme(SC) 300. Paragraph 50 of the said judgment is quoted as under: “50. Since there exists vacuum in the application and details of Section 167 CrPC, we have opted for an interpretation which advances the cause of personal liberty. The accused herein were remanded on 14.05.2020 and as such, the charge sheet ought to have been filed on or before 12.07.2020 (i.e. the sixtieth day). But the same was filed, only on 13.07.2020 which was the 61st day of their custody. Therefore, the right to default bail accrued to the accused persons on 13.07.2020 at 12:00 AM, midnight, onwards. On that very day, the accused filed their default bail applications at 8:53 AM. The ED filed the charge sheet, later in the day, at 11:15 AM. Thus, the default bail Applications were filed well before the charge sheet. In Ravindran(supra) and Bikramjit (supra), which followed the Constitution Bench in Sanjay Dutt(supra) it was rightly held that if the accused persons avail their indefeasible right to default bail before the charge sheet/final report is filed, then such right would not stand frustrated or extinguished by any such subsequent filing. We therefore declare that the stipulated 60/90 day remand period under Section 167 CrPC ought to be computed from the date when a Magistrate authorizes remand. If the first day of remand is excluded, the remand period, as we notice will extend beyond the permitted 60/90 days’ period resulting in unauthorized detention beyond the period envisaged under Section 167 CrPC. In cases where the charge sheet/final report is filed on or after the 61 Page No.# 3/3 st/91st day, the accused in our considered opinion would be entitled to default bail. In other words, the very moment the stipulated 60/90 day remand period expires, an indefeasible right to default bail accrues to the accused.” 5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels of both sides. 6. Since, the charge sheet has been filed on 61st day of the detention, the petitioner is entitled to default bail. 7. Accordingly, his (petitioner’s) bail application is allowed. 8. The petitioner Musharaf Hussain who was arrested in connection with Barpeta P.S. Case No.89/2026 under Sections 21(b)/22(b) of NDPS Act, 1985, shall be released on bail of ₹25,000/- with a surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, Barpeta. With the above direction, the present bail application is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant