Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010103462026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1121/2026 SRI BIDHAN ROY S/O SRI HARI MOHAN ROY,R/O- ROAD- 01, TOWN PRATAPGARH, SUB- SADAR, P.S EAST POLICE STATION, DISTRICT- WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA, PIN CODE-799001. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P KATAKI, MS. A LALA,U BARUAH,MR. S DUTTA,MR SISHIR DUTTA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 11.06.2026 Heard Mr. P. Kataki, the learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. A. Lala, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Borthakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. Page No.# 2/4 2. By this application the petitioner has prayed for pre-arrest bail in connection with Special NDPS Case No. 24/2024, pending in the Court of Sessions Judge, Karimganj, arising out of Bazaricherra P.S. Case No. 29/2024, registered under Sections 22(c)/25/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985. 3. The FIR dated 06.02.2024, revealed that during a Naka checking, the police personnel had stopped a truck and on checking the same found 67 (Sixty Seven) nos. of Cartons containing Codeing, & Triprolidine Hydrochloride Syrup, ESKUF Syrup along with other syrups wrapped with nylon bag and the same was seized after the said recovery. It is also stated in the FIR that the truck was driven by one Ravindra Singh and the case was registered as mentioned above. 4. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that during investigation on the basis of the statements of the co-accused, the petitioner was found to have been involved in the said offence. He also submits that in the investigation, it is stated that, by checking the call data record of a phone, it was found out that the petitioner had spoken with the driver of the vehicle on the said date. He however, had pointed out that the said mobile phone does not belong to the petitioner rather on verification; it was found to be owned by someone else. 5. Mr. P. Borahakur, learned counsel for the State, however, submits that the Page No.# 3/4 payment for the said transaction was made by the petitioner, as revealed during the course of investigation. He further submits that there is a group of persons involved in such business and, as such, has prayed that no bail be granted to the petitioner. 6. On consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsels, more so, in view of the fact that, contrabands were not recovered from the possession of the petitioner and the petitioner being charged only on the statement of the co-accused and also that the phone number pertains to someone else, i.e. Shri Jyotirmay Chakma and Shri, Gopal Chouhan, this court finds it fit that the petitioner be released on pre-arrest bail on furnishing of a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority under the following conditions: (i) The petitioner would appear before the Arresting Authority within a period of 10 days from the date of passing of this order. (ii) The petitioner would also appear before the Trial Court in view of the summons issued to him on the next date fixed. (iii) The petitioner will appear before the Trial Court without fail on each and every date fixed thereafter. The petitioner will not hamper or tamper with the evidence and will not influence the witnesses. Page No.# 4/4 8. The AB application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant