Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./84/2026 of Sh. C. Lalrohlua Vs The State of Mizoram on 16 September 2026
GAHC030006422026 THE GAUHATI
GAHC030006422026
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./84/2026
Sh. C. Lalrohlua
S/o C. Lalzuiliana, Bethlehem Vengthlang, Aizawl. Presently in Central Jail, Aizawl
VERSUS
The State of Mizoram
Aizawl
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr Laltanpuia Advocate for the Respondent : P.P./Addl.PP, Mizoram
BEFORE
HONOURABLE 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
17.09.2026
Heard Mr. Laltanpuia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. Mary L. Khiangte, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the State respondent.
2. This application is under Section 483 BNSS praying for enlargement of the petitioner on bail on connection with Excise & Narcotics Case No. Ex-N-57/2026 u/s 21(c)/22(c) of ND&PS Act dated 19.03.2026.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was arrested on 18.03.2026 at around 5:00 pm in connection with seizure of 500 phials of suspected cough syrup containing codeine phosphate, 781 grams of alprazolam (5890 tablets), 1387 grams of tramadol (4540 capsules), 305.561 of tapentadol (989 tablets), 22.8 grams of nitragepam (200 tablets) and one Iphone 16 pro max at Armed Veng South and Bethlehem Vengthlang. A case was registered as Excise & Narcotics Case No. Ex-N-57/2026 u/s 21(c)/22(c) of ND&PS Act dated 19.03.2026.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner holds a license under Rule 61(2) of the Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940 to sell, stock, exhibit (or offer) for sale or distribute drugs by wholesale drugs specified in C and C (1). The learned counsel has submitted that the business establishment of the petitioner is named M/S Benji Pharmacy. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the permission for running the business as aforesaid had been granted at House No. B-77 Armed Veng South, Aizawl and by an Order dated 01.12.2025, the petitioner had been allowed to shift his business to Bethlehem Vengthlang, H/No. K-70, Aizawl. He submits that accordingly the license had also been issued to him on 01.12.2025, which is at Annexure 8, page 96 of the bail petition.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that while carrying out the change of address of the business, some of the Schedule H1 drugs were retained at his earlier address and some had been kept in the house of a relative without informing the relative. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Arresting Authority had recovered some of the drugs, which he had acquired by legal and lawful means, from two locations where he had stored and stacked them for the ease of transportation. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Aizawl and further he is also a businessman, who has a degree in B. Pharm and has been running the lawful business of a pharmacy. He accordingly prays that the petitioner may be granted the privilege of a bail during the trial period, since the charge sheet has already been submitted and there is a very good chance that the petitioner would be able to prove that the drugs which had been seized were drugs which were legally and lawfully brought and were under transportation during the change of location of the pharmacy.
6. Ms. Mary L. Khiangte, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has submitted that the matter has already been charge sheeted and is undergoing trial and there is ample evidence to show that the petitioner had stored the medicines which fall under the Scheduled H1 drugs at locations where he was not authorized to do so and therefore, the petitioner is required to face the trial.
7. I have heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties and have gone through the scan copy of the TCR.
8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Aizawl and has a business of pharmacy, which is under a license given by the appropriate authority, and that there was a place of change of address of the place of business, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner can be granted the privilege of bail during the period of trial. Accordingly, it is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 1 lakh with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. The learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to impose such other conditions as may be necessary to ensure the participation of the petitioner in the trial proceedings.
9. Bail Application accordingly disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant