Gauhati High Court
Sri Uttam Kumar Chouhan vs The State Of Assam on 22 July, 2026
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010124392026
2026:GAU-AS:10015
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./1663/2026
SRI UTTAM KUMAR CHOUHAN
S/O. LATE SHIV PRASAD CHOUHAN, R/O. BOGORIGHAT, P.S. KHERONI
DISTRICT WEST KARBI ANGLONG, ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. Y S MANNAN, MR. T HUSSAIN
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA
ORDER
Date : 22.07.2026
Heard Mr. Y.S. Mannan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also
heard Mr. K. Baishya, the learned Addl. P.P. for the State respondent.
2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, praying for
granting bail to the accused applicant in connection with NDPS Case No. 32/2026,
Page No.# 2/5
under Section 61(2) of BNS, 2023, read with Section 21(c)/25/29 of the NDPS Act,
corresponding to Manja Police Station Case No. 02/2026.
3. The prosecution’s case in brief is that the informant, Abdul Rafiq Sikdar,
lodged an FIR on 22.01.2026 stating that while doing a regular naka checking at
Langvoku Road along with his colleagues at around 9:30 a.m., one Hero X-Pulse
motorcycle bearing registration number AS-09-M-1354 was intercepted, which was
coming from Langvoku-Koylajan side. It was alleged that motorcycle rider was
signaled to stop for checking, but the same was ignored and they tried to escape
from the naka check point. It was alleged that police team chased the motorcycle
riders and apprehended the riders. The apprehended motorcycle riders were
questioned at the place of occurrence and they have been identified as Uttam
Kumar Chauhan and Suman Dahal. It was alleged that due to suspicion that the
persons might be carrying narcotic substance, the same was informed to the OC
Manja PS and other higher officials of Karbi Anglong. Thereafter, OC Manja PS along
with Deputy Superintendent of Police arrived at the place of occurrence and on
searching the body of the accused Sri Suman Dahal, a total 25 numbers of soap
boxes have been recovered, and a total of 5 numbers of soap boxes, suspected to be
heroin inside, were recovered from Sri Uttam Kumar Chauhan. It was alleged that
inside the soap boxes, some brown color powder was recovered, which was
suspected to be illegal narcotic substance, that is, heroin. It was alleged that test
was conducted on the recovered powder and it was found to be heroin. It was
alleged that total amount of powder, suspected heroin, recovered was 374 grams in
total.
4. In view of the aforesaid FIR, Manja Police Station Case No. 02/2026 under the
aforementioned sections was registered.
5. The accused applicant was arrested on 22.01.2026 and forwarded to the
Page No.# 3/5
Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Karbi Anglong, and since then, the
accused applicant is behind the bars.
6. Mr. Y. S. Mannan, the learned counsel appearing for the accused applicant,
primarily argued that while arresting the accused applicant in the instant case, the
mandates of Article 22(2) have not been complied with by the arresting authority.
He submits that though the accused applicant was arrested at 9:30 a.m. on
22.01.2026, the accused applicant was produced before the learned Court of
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Karbi Anglong on 23.01.2026, beyond 24 hours. He
submits that in the forwarding report, mention has been made about compliance in
terms of issuance of arrest memos, inspection memos, notices under Section 47 and
48 of BNSS, as well as medical examination. He submits that as per the medical
report, the time of medical examination has been shown at 12:13 p.m. on
23.01.2026. He submits that the aforesaid fact indicates that the accused applicant
must have been produced before the learned JMFC post 12:13 p.m. He submits that
if that is so, then the accused applicant must have been produced beyond 24 hours,
which is in violation of Article 22(2) of the Constitution of India and thereby
vitiating the whole process of arrest of the accused applicant. He submits that on
that ground only, which is clearly against the mandates of the provision of the
Constitution, gives the accused applicant an unfettered right to be released on bail.
7. Mr. K. Baishya, the learned Addl. P.P., opposes the bail application, stating that
huge quantity of contraband was recovered from the accused applicant and the co-
accused. Therefore, the prayer of bail should be rejected. He further submits that as
per arrest memo, the arrest was done only at 7:10 p.m. on 22.01.2026. Therefore,
the production of the accused applicant before the learned Court of JFMC, Karbi
Anglong is within 24 hours time as prescribed under Article 22(2) of the
Constitution of India.
Page No.# 4/5
8. The scanned copy of the TCR in the instant case has been received and the
same is perused.
9. On perusal of the records, it is seen that the accused applicant was
apprehended and taken under control of the police at about 9:30 a.m. on
21.06.2026 and thereafter, the process of testing of the seized contraband was
carried out and the accused applicant was produced before the learned JFMC Court.
Though there is no mention of any time as to at what time exactly the accused
applicant was produced before the learned Court of JFMC, Karbi Anglong, from the
order dated 23.01.2026, it transpires that before production of the accused
applicant before the Court of learned JFMC, Karbi Anglong, medical test was
conducted.
10. From perusal of the medical report, it is clear that the medical test was
conducted at 12:13 p.m. on 23.01.2026. This indicates that only after the medical
report, the accused applicant was produced before the learned Court of JFMC, Karbi
Anglong. Therefore, it is discernable that the accused applicant must have been
produced before the learned Court of JFMC, Karbi Anglong after 12:13 p.m. on
23.01.2026, which is clearly beyond the prescribed time of 24 hours.
11. Taking into account the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
the cases of Niranjan Singh and another vs. Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote and
others, reported in (1980) 2 SCC 559, as well as in the case of Directorate of
Enforcement vs. Subhash Sharma, reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 240, this
Court is of the considered opinion that producing the accused applicant beyond 24
hours before the learned Court of JFMC, Karbi Anglong, there is a violation of Article
22(2) of the Constitution of India.
12. From the aforesaid facts, it is discernable that there is a violation of mandate
of Section 58 read with Section 62 of the BNSS in the instant case, which goes to the
Page No.# 5/5
root of the matter, making the whole arrest procedure violative of Article 22(2) of
the Constitution of India. Therefore, the rigours of Section 37 of NDPS Act will not
be applicable in the instant case.
13. In view of the aforesaid findings, it is directed that the accused applicant
shall be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- (One Lakh) with
two sureties of like nature, at least one of whom should be a government servant, to
the satisfaction of the Special Judge, Karbi Anglong, subject to the following
conditions: –
1. That the accused applicant shall appear before the trial court as and when
required;
2. That the accused applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or
intimidate any witnesses connected with the case.
14. In terms of the aforesaid directions, the instant bail application stands
disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
