Page No.# 1/4 GAHC030003092026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./36/2026 Sh Kymul Hussain Barbhuiya S/o Siraj Uddin Barbhuiya, R/o Narainpur, Cachar District, Assam VERSUS The State of Mizoram R/ b the Secretary, Home Department, Aizawl 2:The Officer-in-Charg Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. S. Vanlalhriata Advocate for the Respondent : P.P./Addl.PP, Mizoram B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 05.06.2026 Heard Mr. S. Vanlalhriata, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mrs. Mary L. Khiangte, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, r/w Section 37 of the ND&PS Act, 1985 to enlarge the accused/petitioner on bail Page No.# 2/4 pending trial in ND&PS Case No. 184/2025 Ref: Ngopa P.S. Case No. 1/2026 under Section 21(c)/25/29 of the ND&PS Act, 1985. 3. The facts of the case in brief which led to the filing of this instant petition are that on 27.01.2026 at 2:30 AM, ASI Chanchinmawia seized 597 grams of Heroin (55 soap cases) concealed inside a spare tyre from a Mahindra Pickup bearing Registration No. AS 11 FC 6271 at Ngopa Checkgate. In connection with the seizure of the said Heroin, Aber Hussain Barbhuiya, Kymul Hussain Barbhuiya, and Fayaz Ahmed Barbhuiya were arrested at the same time and booked in Ngopa P.S. Case No. 1/2026 for the offence under Section 21(c)/25/29 of the ND&PS Act, 1985, dated 27.01.2026. 4. The petitioner was arrested on 27.01.2026 and since then he has spent a period of 129 days in custody till date. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the notice under Section 47 BNSS furnished to the petitioner is defective as it does not contain any ground of arrest, thereby vitiating the arrest. It is further submitted that no notice under Section 48 has been served upon the family members/friends/nominated person of the arrested petitioner, a fact, that has not been refuted by the prosecution. A perusal of the extracts of the Case Diary produced by the prosecution does not contain any notice under Section Page No.# 3/4 48, BNSS. 6. I have perused the Order dated 08.04.2026 passed by the Learned Special Court, ND&PS Act, Aizawl rejecting the Bail Application of the petitioner, wherein it is stated that the grounds of arrest and arrest intimation were duly furnished to the accused/petitioner in writing, but it is nowhere apparent as to how or on what material the Learned Court below came to the said finding. 7. A perusal of the notice under Section 47 BNSS furnished along with the extract of the Case Diary lends force to the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, inasmuch as the same does not contain any ground of arrest. It is also to be noted that the format being used by the Arresting Officer does not contain any column for recording the grounds of arrest, although the law has been laid down long back regarding the necessity of furnishing the grounds of arrest in writing in the case of Vihaan Kumar Vs. State of Haryana & Anr. reported in (2025) SCC OnLine SC 269 and even prior thereto. However, it appears that the District Police Authorities have not yet woken up to the need to draw up a proper format under Section 47, BNSS for furnishing the grounds of arrest, which has led to arrests in violation of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court, thereby resulting in the Page No.# 4/4 release of the accused persons on technical grounds even in cases of serious nature like the present one which relates to the recovery of a commercial quantity of contraband drugs. 8. In view of the above, it is evident that the arrest of the accused/petitioner has been rendered illegal due to non-furnishing of the grounds of arrest to the petitioner and to his relatives/friends/nominated person, which entitles the accused/petitioner to be released on bail. 9. It is accordingly directed that the accused/petitioner shall be released on bail of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Learned Special Court, ND&PS Act, Aizawl District. It is further provided that the petitioner shall continue to co-operate with the investigation and shall not try to tamper with the evidence in any manner. 10. Communicate a copy of this order to the Superintendent of Police, Saitual District, Mizoram. 11. Return the extract of the Case Diary to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. JUDGE Comparing Assistant