Bappan Das And Anr vs The State Of Assam on 7 July, 2026

    0
    7
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Gauhati High Court

    Bappan Das And Anr vs The State Of Assam on 7 July, 2026

                                                                            Page No.# 1/3
    
    GAHC010138342026
    
    
    
    
                                                                      2026:GAU-AS:9464
    
                                  THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
       (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
    
                                   Case No. : Bail Appln./1855/2026
    
                BAPPAN DAS AND ANR
                SON OF HIRALAL DAS,
    
                2: GOPESH DAS
                 SON OF SOMENDRA DAS
                 BOTH ARE THE RESIDENTS OF - VILLAGE SAIDPUR
                 PART - 3
                 P.O AMTALA
                 P.S. KATIGARA
                 PIN CODE -788815
                 DISTRICT CACHAR
                ASSA
    
                VERSUS
    
                THE STATE OF ASSAM
                REPRESENTED BY P.P. ASSAM
    
    
    
    Advocate for the Petitioner   : RAKESH DHAR, MR. H DAS
    
    Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
                                                                                  Page No.# 2/3
    
    
    
    
                                          :: BEFORE ::
                      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA
    
    
                                          O R D E R
    

    07.07.2026

    Heard the learned counsel Mr. R. Dhar appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr.
    K. Baishya, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam.

    SPONSORED

    2. This application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been preferred by the
    petitioners, namely- (1) Bappan Das and (2) Gopesh Das, who are detained behind the
    bars since 06.05.2026 (for the last 60 days) in connection with Rangia G.R.P.S. Case
    No.22/2026, under Sections 21(b)/29 of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985.

    3. The gist of accusations in this case is that on 07.05.2026, one Prahlad Mandal, S.I.
    of Police (complainant) has lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Rangia G.R.P.S.
    stating, inter alia, that during routine platform checking at Plat Form No.2 of Rangia
    Railway Station by GRPS personnel on 06.05.2026, 33 grms of heroin was recovered from
    the present petitioners.

    4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since the weight of the
    contraband seized in this case is an intermediate quantity, hence, the maximum period of

    detention during the course of investigation is 60 days only and today is the 60 th day of
    their arrest. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that embargo of
    Section 37 of the NDPS Act is not attracted in this case. The learned Addl. Public

    Prosecutor also raises no objection as today is the 62 nd day of the arrest of the
    petitioners.

    5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and
    Page No.# 3/3

    have gone through the materials available on record.

    6. Considering the quantity of contraband seized in this case, which is an intermediate
    quantity and considering the period of detention of the present petitioners, they are
    entitled to get bail on the ground of completion of statutory period of detention.

    7. As such, the both the present petitioners, namely- (1) Bappan Das and (2) Gopesh
    Das, who are detained behind the bars since 06.05.2026 (for the last 60 days) in
    connection with Rangia G.R.P.S. Case No.22/2026, under Sections 21(b)/29 of N.D.P.S.
    Act, shall be released on bail of ₹50,000/- each with sureties of like amount to the
    satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, Rangia subject to fulfilling of the following
    conditions:

    i. The petitioners shall co-operate in the investigation and

    ii. The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat
    or promise to the informant or to other person who may be acquainted with
    the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such
    facts before the Investigating Officer or to any Court.

    With the aforesaid direction, the present bail application is disposed of.

    JUDGE

    Comparing Assistant



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here