AVDHESH KUMAR ROY AND ANR v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. S K NARGIS, A SAHA,MR F H LASKAR (2),MS N SULTANA,MS S BEGUM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK BEFORE Page No.# 2/5 20/05/2025 Heard Ms. S K Nargis, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. K K Parashar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam.

2. The petitioners, namely, (1) Avdhesh Kumar Roy, son of Kailash Roy, resident of Village- Nawa Nagar, P.S. Biddupur, District-Baishali, Bihar and (2) Amarjeet Kumar, son of Haribansh Ray, resident of Village-Nawa Nagar, P.S. Biddupur, District-Baishali, Bihar, have filed this application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, on 22.04.2025, praying for his bail in Special (NDPS) Case No. 24/2024 arising out of Rangia G.R.P.S. Case No. 13/2024 corresponding to G.R. No. 145/2024 registered under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/29 of the NDPS Act, wherein they were arrested on 13.02.2024 and are in custody since then.

3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners by Ms. Nargis, learned counsel that though charge under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 were framed against the petitioners way back on 23.12.2024, but as on April, 2025, the prosecution failed to adduce evidence of any of its witnesses.

4. In addition to the above, Ms. Nargis, learned counsel for the petitioners by placing the Notice under Section 50 of the Cr.P.C. issued to the petitioners on 13.02.2024 submitted that those are not in conformity with the provisions of Section 50 of the Cr.P.C. as well as the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of (i) Prabir Purkayastha Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (2024) 8 SCC 254 and (ii) Vihaan Kumar Vs. State of Haryana and Another, reported in (2025) SCC OnLine SC

5. Ms. Nargis, learned counsel for the petitioners also submitted that Notice under Section 50A of the Cr.P.C. have not been issued to the petitioners, while arresting them on 13.02.2024 in said Rangia G.R.P.S. Case No. 13/2024.

6. Perused the records of Special (NDPS) Case No. 24/2024 pending before the Court of learned Special Judge (NDPS), Rangia, Kamrup along with the records of Rangia G.R.P.S. Case No. 13/2024 that were called for by order dated 25.04.2025. Page No.# 3/5

7. Matter relates to recovery of 46.46 Kgs. of Ganja from the conscious possession of the petitioners when they were apprehended during routine checking inside the running Train bearing No. 20501 while petitioners were travelling in the said train, i.e., Tejab Express at Rangia Railway Station on 13.02.2024 around 9:35 AM.

8. It is seen from the records of the case that after the arrest of the petitioners on 13.02.2024, both of them were produced before the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rangia, Kamrup on

14.02.2024.

9. The FSL report dated 12.03.2024 pertaining to the seized substances seized from the conscious possessions of the petitioners confirmed to be Cannabis.

10. On completion of the investigation, police submitted the charge-sheet in said Rangia G.R.P.S. Case No. 13/2024 on 15.05.2024 vide Charge-sheet No. 14 under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/29 of the NDPS Act against the petitioners.

11. After filing of the charge-sheet in said Rangia G.R.P.S. Case No. 13/2024, same has been registered as Special (NDPS) Case No. 24/2024 before the Court of learned Special Judge (NDPS), Rangia, Kamrup and on 29.07.2024, the learned Special Judge (NDPS), Rangia, Kamrup took cognizance of the offences under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/29 of the NDPS Act. Subsequently, on

23.12.2024, charges under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/29 of NDPS Act were framed against the accused petitioners and summons were issued to the prosecution witnesses.

12. It is seen from the records of the case that 20.01.2025 was the first date for adducing evidence by the prosecution, but on the said date, the concerned witness could not remain present before the Court as he was undergoing training. As such, 14.02.2025 was the next date fixed for adducing evidence. On 14.02.2025, prosecution witnesses were absent and it was accordingly fixed on

28.02.2025 and even on 28.02.2025, the prosecution witnesses were absent and the case was fixed on 26.03.2025. On 26.03.2025, one prosecution witness was to appear for adducing evidence but he was sent for training for which he could not appear and the Court had granted time fixing the matter on 23.04.2025 for evidence. On 23.04.2025, the report was placed before the learned Special Judge (NDPS), Rangia, Kamrup that summons issued to the accused concerned returned as he could not be traced. As such, the Court of learned Special Judge (NDPS), Rangia, Kamrup on 23.04.2025 issued summon to the other prosecution witnesses, fixing the matter today, i.e., 20.05.2025 before the said Court. Page No.# 4/5

13. From the records of the case, it is seen that while arresting both the petitioners, their relatives were present.

14. From the records of the case, it is also seen that though notice under Section 50 of the Cr.P.C. was issued to the petitioners on 13.02.2024 and received by the petitioners, but those are not in conformity with the provisions of Section 50 of the Cr.P.C. and as been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of (i) Prabir Purkayastha (Supra) and (ii) Vihaan Kumar (Supra) and thereby violated the provisions of Article 22 of the Constitution of India.

15. It is also seen that both the petitioners are from outside the State of Assam, resident of Bihar.

16. Considering such materials in the case records, the Court found that the petitioners are entitled for their bail in said Special (NDPS) Case No. 24/2024 arising out of Rangia G.R.P.S. Case No. 13/2024.

17. Accordingly, the petitioners, namely, (1) Avdhesh Kumar Roy, son of Kailash Roy and (2) Amarjeet Kumar, son of Haribansh Ray, be released on bail in said Special (NDPS) Case No. 24/2024 arising out of Rangia G.R.P.S. Case No. 13/2024 corresponding to G.R. No. 145/2024 registered under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/29 of the NDPS Act, on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.2,00,000/- with 2 (two) local sureties each of the like amount, one of which shall be a Government Employee, either Central or State Government, permanently serving in the State of Assam, to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge (NDPS), Rangia, Kamrup, subject to the conditions that the petitioners, named above – (i) shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the learned Special Judge (NDPS), Rangia, Kamrup without obtaining prior written permission from the said authority, till disposal of said Special (NDPS) Case No. 24/2024; (ii) shall regularly attend the Trial before the learned Special Judge (NDPS), Rangia, Kamrup in said Special (NDPS) Case No. 24/2024 and shall co-operate with the said Special Court during the trial of the said case till its disposal; (iii) shall not hamper with the investigation, or tamper with the evidence of the case; (iv) 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and (v) shall not involve themselves in any criminal activities in future; Page No.# 5/5

18. Violation of any of the aforesaid conditions by the petitioners, (1) Avdhesh Kumar Roy and (2) Amarjeet Kumar, the bail granted to them in the aforesaid Special (NDPS) Case No. 24/2024 arising out of Rangia G.R.P.S. Case No. 13/2024 shall stand automatically vacated.

19. It is also made clear that the learned Special Judge (NDPS), Rangia, Kamrup shall be at liberty to impose any other conditions, as it deems fit and proper at the time of releasing the accused petitioner on bail in said Special (NDPS) Case No. 24/2024 arising out of Rangia G.R.P.S. Case No. 13/2024 to procure their attendance during the trial of the said Special (NDPS) Case.

20. It is observed that this order relates to bail of the accused petitioners, namely, (1) Avdhesh Kumar Roy and (2) Amarjeet Kumar, in said Special (NDPS) Case No. 24/2024 arising out of Rangia G.R.P.S. Case No. 13/2024 and not on merits of the case.

21. Petitioners, named above, be released on bail accordingly, if they are not required in any other criminal case.

22. With the above observation and direction, this bail application of the petitioners, named above, stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant