Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./28/2026 of Sh. Fizur Uddin Vs The State of Mizoram on 8 June 2026
GAHC030002082026 THE GAUHATI
GAHC030002082026
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./28/2026
Sh. Fizur Uddin
S/o Moin Uddin
R/o Karimganj, Assam
VERSUS
The State of Mizoram
Aizawl
Advocate for the Petitioner : Smt. Bhuneshwari Devi Advocate for the Respondent : P.P./Addl.PP, Mizoram
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
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 : 09-06-2026
Heard Ms. B. Devi, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Ms. Vanneihsiami, Addl. Public Prosecutor.
2. The petitioner had been arrested on 26.11.2025 in connection with the seizure of 306 grams of Heroin. The charge sheet was filed on 08.05.2026, during the pendency of this application for bail.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner has not filed any application for bail before the learned Trial Court after charge sheet had been submitted, the enforcement agency having failed to comply with the mandatory provisions of law at the time of seizure and arrest of the applicant, the petitioner is entitled to grant of bail. She also submits that the applicant had initially approached the learned Trial Court for default bail under Section 187 of the BNSS, 2023, which was rejected vide Order dated 27.02.2025 passed in Bail Application No. 85/2026.
4. Ms. Vanneihsiami, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor submits she has not received the complete bail petition even today. She also submits that as charge sheet has been filed, the petitioner should approach the learned Trial Court for bail, especially when bail is being prayed for on the merits of the case.
5. On considering the fact that the petitioner’s earlier bail application had only been for grant of default bail under Section 187 BNSS, which had been rejected, this Court is of the view that the petitioner should first approach the learned Trial Court for bail on merits, as charge sheet has already been filed before the learned Trial Court. It has also been submitted at the bar that the case has been fixed in the Trial Court on 12.06.2026 for charge consideration.
6. In view of the above facts, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present bail application, as the petitioner has not approach the learned Trial Court for bail, after filing of the charge sheet for bail.
7. Accordingly, Bail Application is rejected.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant