Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./2300/2026 of AL AMIN KHAN ALIAS ALAMIN KHAN Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 30 August 2026
GAHC010166942026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2300/2026 AL AMIN KHAN ALIAS ALAMIN KHAN SON OF HUSSAIN KHAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGEMAJGAON, POLICE STATIONPATACHARKUCHI, DISTRICBAJALI, ASSAM, AT PRESENT LODGED IN THE
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010166942026
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./2300/2026
AL AMIN KHAN ALIAS ALAMIN KHAN
SON OF HUSSAIN KHAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGEMAJGAON, POLICE
STATIONPATACHARKUCHI, DISTRICBAJALI, ASSAM, AT PRESENT
LODGED IN THE DISTRICT JAIL, BARPETA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M AHMED, MR A HAI,A RAHMAN
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE
HONOURABLE 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
Date : 31.08.2026 Heard Mr. M. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner and K. Baishya, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State respondent. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for granting regular bail to the petitioner, namely, Al-Amin Khan @ Alamin Khan, in connection with Howly P.S. Case No. 94/2026, registered under Sections 21(b)/ 29 of the NDPS Act.
Page No.# 2/2 The allegation against the petitioner is that upon receipt of a secret information police conducted a Naka Checking at the Howly Swahid Bedi Point and apprehended one motor vehicle carrying the present petitioner and the co- accused and upon search one soap containing 12.23 grams of heroin excluding the soap was recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The case has been investigated and charge sheeted. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that charge sheet having been filed, the detention of the petitioner is no longer necessary and having regard to the period of detention for about 72 days, the prayer for bail may be allowed. The learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand opposes the bail application on the ground that the trial of the case is yet to commence and releasing the petitioner on bail at this stage jeopardize the trial. Having regard to the incriminating materials available in the case diary wherefrom it appears that the petitioner is involved in the sale of narcotic drugs and the seriousness of the drug menace that is affecting the society, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of bail merely on account of the period of detention undergone. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected. Return the case dairy. The bail application is dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant