Bail Appln./21/2026 of Sh.Sukur Ali Vs The State of Mizoram on 4 June 2026

ORDER

05.06.2026

Heard Mr. Vikash Jammar, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. Vanneihsiami, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant should be granted bail, as the grounds of arrest were mere recitals and the same could not be said to be grounds of arrest, to enable the prosecution to put the accused in judicial custody, in violation of Article 21 & 22 of the Constitution. In support of his contention, the learned counsel has relied upon the orders passed in Bail Application No. 33/2026, Bail Application No. 31/2026, Bail Application No. 20/2026 and in a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Mihir Rajesh Shah Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr., reported in (2026) 1 SCC 500. Ms. Vanneihsiami, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor submits that charge sheet has been filed in the case and the matter had been listed for consideration/framing of charge on 02.06.2026. However, Mr. Vikash Jammar, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the date of framing of charge has now been fixed on 16.06.2026. This Court has seen the Arrest Memo and the Grounds of Arrest, where the bottom portion is recorded in hindi, to the effect that the applicant was informed that the Saitual Police had caught his vehicle with drugs and the incident had been informed to the applicant’s family the Grounds of belief. The Grounds of Arrest shows that there were 50 bundles containing suspected Methamphetamine, weighing a total of 21.729 kgs, which were recovered from his Tata 1916 truck bearing registration No. AS 01 TC 5997, Engine No. 3.3LNGD11HUX517795, Chasis No. MAT847020S7415319, which was an offence under Section 22(c)/25/29 of the NDPS Act. The applicant was also informed that he was the driver and occupant of the vehicle transporting drugs, which was in his possession and the same was punishable under the NDPS Act. He was arrested for the commission of the offence under the above said Sections on 20.01.2026 at 9:30 AM in connection with STL-PS Case No. 9/2026 dated 20.01.2026. The applicant was also informed that the offence was non-bailable and he had the right engage a lawyer of his choice for his defence. On considering the fact that the applicant has not filed any bail application after filing of the charge sheet before the learned Trial Court and keeping in view the fact that consideration/framing of charge is fixed on 16.02.2026, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present Bail Application at this stage, especially when the bottom portion of the above two documents, i.e. grounds of arrest and arrest memo, show that the applicant knew that he was arrested for drugs recovered from his truck and he was told he could engage a advocate, besides his relatives being informed of the incident. This Court is of the view that the applicant should first approach the learned Trial Court with regard to his prayer for bail, in view of the charge sheet having been filed in the learned Trial Court. Bail Application is accordingly rejected at this stage.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant