Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./2418/2026 of AFRAZ PATHAN Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 1 September 2026
GAHC010179202026 2026:GAU-AS:12721 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2418/2026 AFRAZ PATHAN S/O- RIYAZUDDIN PATHAN VILL KHOMIDOK, MASAJID MANING P.O PANGEI PS HEINGANG DIST. IMPHAL EAST MANIPUR PIN-795T14 VERSUS THE STATE
GAHC010179202026
2026:GAU-AS:12721
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./2418/2026
AFRAZ PATHAN
S/O- RIYAZUDDIN PATHAN VILL KHOMIDOK, MASAJID MANING P.O
PANGEI PS HEINGANG DIST. IMPHAL EAST MANIPUR PIN-795T14
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : S K PODDAR, MR. R GHOSH,R MANDAL,K AHMED,MR. C
SHARMA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, B E F O R E
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
02.09.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for granting bail to the petitioner, who was detained on 08.08.2025 at 11:25 pm and remanded on 10.08.2025 at 3:00 pm in connection with Rangia GRPS Case No. 53/2025 under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c)/20 of the NDPS Case No. 25/2025.
3. As per the allegations, the petitioners were travelling from Rangia Railway Station to Guwahati Railway Station, and upon suspicion, they were deboarded at Rangia Railway Station at 11:30 p.m. on 08.08.2025. Upon search, a total of 82.658 kgs of suspected ganja was recovered from the trolley bags carried by the petitioners.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners assails the arrest of the petitioners on several grounds, viz., that the petitioners having been effectively taken into detention at 11:30 p.m. on 08.08.2025 were forwarded and produced before the Magistrate only on 10.08.2025, which was beyond 24 hours of their arrest, thereby violating the mandate of Article 22 of the Constitution of India. It is further submitted that the arrest memo shows the date and time of arrest as 09.08.2025 at 8:00 p.m., but it lacks the signature of any relatives or respected persons of the locality, thereby violating Section 36 of the BNSS. Moreover, the notice under Section 47 of the BNSS served upon the petitioner does not mention the quantity of the seized drugs, and consequently, adequate grounds of arrest were not furnished. A similar flaw is pointed out regarding the notice under Section 48 of the BNSS, in addition to the fact that there was no proper service of such notice, which was claimed to have been sent via WT message.
5. A perusal of the record lends substance to the aforesaid submissions, and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor could not dispute these factual aspects of the matter.
6. Having regard to the above, and in view of the gross violations of statutory as well as constitutional provisions, the petitioner herein is entitled to bail notwithstanding the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is allowed.
8. The petitioner is allowed to go on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Special Judge, Rangia, subject to the conditions that the petitioner shall cooperate in the trial of the case and shall not try to influence the remaining witnesses in any manner.
9. The bail petition stands allowed and disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant