Samsad Alom @ Md Samsad Alom @ Raju v. The State of Assam

ORDER

06.01.2023

Heard Mr. N.J. Dutta, learned counsel for the accused and Ms. S.H. Bora, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.

¶2This application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Page No.# 2/3 is preferred by accused, namely, Samsad Alom @ Md. Samsad Alom @ Raju, who has been languishing in jail hazot since 22.12.2022, in connection with the Basistha P.S. Case No. 1035/2022, under Sections 21[a]/29 of the NDPS Act, for granting bail.

¶3The aforementioned case has been registered on the basis of one FIR lodged by SI Mukunda Sarmah, on 04.12.2022, to the effect that acting on a tip off they have apprehended 3 persons, namely, Sri Vicky Sonar; Sri Sanjay Kumar Shah; and Sri Dipankar Bhuyan at Kerakuchi behind the Hockey Stadium and on conducting search of their person, they have recovered suspected heroin, weighing 3.12 grams [without container] and seized the same preparing seizure list, in presence of witnesses.

¶4Mr. Dutta, learned counsel for the accused submits that nothing has been recovered from the present accused and the quantity of contraband substance recovered from the co-accused is of less than intermediate quantity and the accused is behind the bar for last 16 days, and therefore, it is contended to enlarge the present accused on bail.

¶5On the other hand, Ms. Bora, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submits that the quantity of contraband substance, recovered from the possession of the 3 accused persons namely, Sri Vicky Sonar; Sri Sanjay Kumar Shah; and Sri Dipankar Bhuyan is less than intermediate quantity.

¶6Having heard the submission of learned Advocates for both sides, I have carefully gone through the petition and the materials placed on record.

¶7It appears that the accused persons have been arrested on 22.12.2022, and since then they have been languishing in the jail hajot. Further, it appears that the quantity of contraband substance recovered from their possession is, admittedly, small quantity i.e. 3.12 grams only.

¶7Considering the period of detention and the nature of accusation and the punishment prescribed for the offence and also considering the submission of learned Page No.# 3/3 Advocates for both sides, this Court is of considered opinion that further custodial detention of the accused seems to be not required in the interest of investigation.

¶8Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000/- only, with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, NDPS Act, Kamrup [M] at Guwahati, the accused persons are enlarged on bail.

¶9In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010000642023 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./58/2023 SAMSAD ALOM @ MD SAMSAD ALOM @ RAJU S/O- MD. ASRAF ALI, R/O- BASISTHA CHARIALI, NEAR HINDI SCHOOL, H/NO- 98, P.S- BASISTHA, DIST- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR N J DUTTA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN