Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./444/2026 of PANKAJ SHIL Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 7 May 2026
GAHC010027832026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./444/2026 PANKAJ SHIL S/O LAKHAN SHIL,R/O DELIEZHU COLONY, PS DIMAPUR, DIST DIMAPUR, NAGALAND VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE STANDING COUNSEL, NCB
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010027832026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./444/2026
PANKAJ SHIL
S/O LAKHAN SHIL,R/O DELIEZHU COLONY, PS DIMAPUR, DIST DIMAPUR, NAGALAND
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE STANDING COUNSEL, NCB
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR D MEDHI, MR. S SARKAR,MR K THAKUR
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS
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
08.05.2026
1. Heard Mr. D. Medhi, learned counsel appearing for the accused petitioner as well as Mr. M. P. Goswami, learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing for the State respondent.
2. This petition under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the accused-petitioner, namely, Pankaj Shil, praying for grant of bail in connection with GRPS Guwahati PS Case No.139/2025 under Sections 21(C)/29 of the NDPS Act which after completion of investigation resulted in a charge- Page No.# 2/2 sheet and registered as NDPS Case No. 26/2026 before the learned Special Judge, Kamrup(M).
3. By order dated 10/3/2026, charges have been framed against two accused including the petitioner under sections 21(C)/29 of the NDPS Act and the case posted for prosecution evidence.
4. The scanned TCR has been received.
5. Mr. Medhi, learned counsel, submits that the recovery of the contraband in the nature of alleged commercial quantity of morphine was recovered from the co-accused rather than this petitioner.
6. I have perused the relevant portions of the case diary.
7. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has drawn attention to the statements of the seizure witnesses. As for the statement of the seizure witnesses and materials collected by investigation, though the package containing the alleged contraband was recovered from the co-accused but investigation states that both the persons were traveling together and with common intention of selling the contraband in Bihar.
8. On the basis of the materials, it cannot be said at this stage that the test of Section 37 is passed in favour of the petitioner and therefore, at this stage the Court will be statutorily barred from granting bail. It is hoped that the learned trial court will endeavour to expeditiously complete the trial.
9. Accordingly, this bail application stands rejected and disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant