Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010131592026 2026:GAU-AS:9716 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1426/2026 MOON ALI SON OF MD. ISLAM ALI R/O ISLAMPUR, WARD NO 2, P.S RANGIYA, DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM,. PIN-781365 VERSUS STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PP, GOVT OF ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : DARAK ULLAH, DEBAKSHI BORA,MS A HUSSAIN,SABRISH AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS O R D E R 16.07.2026 Heard Mr. D. Ullah, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State respondent. Page No.# 2/3 2. This is an application under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 praying for granting anticipatory bail to the accused/petitioner, Moon Ali who is apprehending arrest in connection with Rangia P.S Case No. 160/2026 under Section 21(b) NDPS Act. 3. The gist of the allegations in the FIR dated 17.06.2026 is that the Police party upon getting information about peddling of heroin by the petitioner/Moon Ali went to the stated location and it is alleged that upon noticing arrival of the police party, the said Moon Ali threw a black-colored polythene into the roof of the neighbouring house, Raju Ali, and jumped from the rooftop and fled away. During subsequent search, the polythene packet was recovered and it was found to contain 97 plastic vials containing suspected heroin, which were later weighed and found to be 10.63 grams, excluding the containers. 4. Mr. Ullah, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the suspected contraband was found from the rooftop of one Raju Ali as contended by the prosecution and that the story of the prosecution that it is the petitioner, who threw the contraband on the rooftop of Raju Ali is false. It is submitted that the petitioner is not involved in the alleged offense of possession or peddling of narcotic drugs. 5. It is submitted that the petitioner does not fulfill any of the roles which has been mentioned in Section 21 of the NDPS Act to attract the said penal provision. It is submitted that there are no contraband seized from his possession. 6. On the other hand, the learned Addl. P.P., on the basis of the case diary, submits that investigation is not yet completed and that the seizure witnesses have also implicated the petitioner. 7. I have considered the materials and the submissions. Page No.# 3/3 8. I have perused the statement of some independent seizure witnesses, purportedly independent witnesses and they have made implications against the petitioner stating inter-alia that he has been indulging in drug peddling in that area and that the said fact is known in the locality. The investigation has lent support to the allegations about the nature of the incident. 9. Considering the prima facie implicating materials and continuance of the investigation - it may not be prudent to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage. 10. Accordingly, the instant bail petition stands rejected at this stage. Return back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant