✦ Gauhati High Court

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

MALASRI NANDI2 min read

Case at a glance

Bench
MALASRI NANDI

Outcome

Bail granted

that the accused/ petitioner be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs

Judgment

Operative part

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI Date : 04 .04. 2024 ORDER Heard Mr. S. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. BB Gogoi, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., filed by the petitioner namely, Sri Benu Das, praying for bail, who was arrested on 04.02.2024 in connection with Dhemaji P.S. Case No. 18/2024 under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act. Case diary is received and perused. Heard both sides. Page No.# 2/2 It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused was arrested on 04.02.2024 and since then he has been in judicial custody. By this way, he has completed the mandatory period of 60 days. The case was registered under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act and the charge sheet has not yet been submitted. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the charge sheet has not yet been submitted and the accused/ petitioner may be enlarged on bail considering the period of detention. In view of the above, considering the materials available on the record including the length of detention I find that further custodial interrogation of the accused may not be required. Accordingly, I find it to be a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on bail. It is directed that the accused/ petitioner be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 50,000/- with 2 suitable sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, Dhemaji in connection with the aforementioned case. The direction for bail is further subject to the conditions that the accused-petitioner: (a) shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the learned Special Judge, Dhemaji, without prior written permission from him/ her; (b) shall not hamper with the investigation of the case and tamper in the evidence of the case; and (c) shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. In terms of the above, this bail application stands disposed of. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: that the accused/ petitioner be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 439; Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(b)(ii)(B).

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Gauhati High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments