Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./4023/2025 of NARAYAN BASUMATARY Vs STATE OF ASSAM on 26 March 2026
GAHC010273222025 2026:GAU-AS:4475 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./4023/2025 NARAYAN BASUMATARY S/O- LT. MADAN BASUMATARY R/ O- VILL- KISHANPUR P.S.-MAJBAT P.O- PATHAKPUR DIST.- UDALGURI -BTR ASSAM PIN-784507 VERSUS
GAHC010273222025
2026:GAU-AS:4475
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./4023/2025
NARAYAN BASUMATARY
S/O- LT. MADAN BASUMATARY R/ O- VILL- KISHANPUR P.S.-MAJBAT P.O- PATHAKPUR DIST.- UDALGURI -BTR ASSAM PIN-784507
VERSUS
STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OF ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR G KAKOTI, S MEDHI,MS. D KHAKHALARY,MR. P
THAKURIA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR
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
27.03.2026 Heard Mr P Thakuria, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr R J Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.
2. This is an application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023, praying for bail in connection with Special (NDPS) Case No. 43/2025, arising out of Rangapara GRPS Case No. 12/2025, under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/29 of the NDPS Act, in favour of Narayan Basumatary, son of Late Madah Basumatary.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been behind bars for the last 296 days. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that out of 6 (six) witnesses, three witnesses have been examined, and one of the seizure witnesses has already stated that he does not know about the seizure.
4. The perusal of the records also indicate the above.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that this Court may consider the prayer for bail of the petitioner since the petitioner has stated that he is not involved in the alleged offence, as no recovery has been made from his person and the seizure list also does not indicate any such recovery.
6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has objected to the bail petition on the ground that the offences are heinous and the PW-1 and PW-2 have implicated the petitioner. It is further submitted that the rigours of Section 37 would also be attracted in this case.
7. We have gone through the records and also considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.
8. This Court is of the opinion that the petitioner deserves the privilege of bail at this stage in view of the seizure list and statements of the witnesses.
9. Accordingly, it is directed that the petitioner, if not wanted in any other case, shall be released, in the event, he submits a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of the like amount, one of whom shall be a Government Servant, to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. The learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to impose any other such condition or conditions as it may deem fit for ensuring the participation of the petitioner in the trial proceedings.
10. Bail Application stands disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant