Mofidul Hashem vs The State Of Assam on 9 July, 2026

    0
    6
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Gauhati High Court

    Mofidul Hashem vs The State Of Assam on 9 July, 2026

    Author: Kalyan Rai Surana

    Bench: Kalyan Rai Surana

                                                                             Page No.# 1/2
    
    GAHC010132142026
    
    
    
    
                                                                      undefined
    
                                  THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
         (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
    
                                   Case No. : Bail Appln./1755/2026
    
                MOFIDUL HASHEM
                SON OF LATE REZAUL HASHEM, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
                MORIMUSLIMGAON, MORIGAON, PS MORIGAON, DISTRICT MORIGAON,
                ASSAM, PIN CODE 782105
    
    
    
                VERSUS
    
                THE STATE OF ASSAM
                REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
    
    
    
    Advocate for the Petitioner   : MS. S K NARGIS, MS N SULTANA
    
    Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
    
    
    
    
                                       BEFORE
                       HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA
    
                                               ORDER
    

    Date : 09.07.2026

    Heard Ms. S.K. Nargis, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. B.
    Sharma, learned APP for the State.

    SPONSORED

    2. Pursuant to order dated 26.06.2026, the case diary has been produced
    by the learned APP.

    Page No.# 2/2

    3. In Course of her submission, the learned counsel for the petitioner has
    cited the case of State of West Bengal Vs. Rakesh Singh alias Rakesh Kumar
    Singh, (2022) 19 SCC 306 and has submitted that whenever offence of Section
    27 A
    of the NDPS Act is involved, rigours of Section 37 is not applicable.

    However, it is noticed that a 3-Judge Bench the Supreme Court of India, in the
    case of Satpal Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2018) 13 SCC 813, took note of
    offences under Section 19, 24 and 27 A of the NDPS Act as well as Section 37 of
    the NDPS Act and had observed that the High Court could not pass order under
    Section 438 or 439, Cr.P.C., without reference to Section 37 and without
    entering a finding without required level of satisfaction.

    4. Accordingly, the Court is inclined to give an opportunity to learned
    counsel for the petitiotner to make her submissions.

    5. List on 14.07.2026.

    6. The learned APP shall retain the case diary till then.

    JUDGE

    Comparing Assistant



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here