Khudeja Khatun v. The State of Assam

ORDER Date : 21-03-2024 Heard Mr. N. Hasan, learned counsel for the accused/petitioner. Also heard Page No.# 2/3 Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶2This is an application made under Section 439 Cr.P.C., seeking bail by the accused/petitioners, namely, (i) Smti. Khudeja Khatun and (ii) Sri Ataur Rahman, in connection with Special (NPDS) Case no. 02/2024 registered under Section 21(c)/29 of the NDPS Act, pending in the court of learned Special Judge, Hojai.

¶3Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that no any contraband was recovered from the petitioners. As per seizure list, ganja was seized from the roof of the toilet and the petitioner no. 1 i.e. the wife of the petitioner no. 2 had practically no knowledge regarding keeping of contraband on the roof of the toilet.

¶4The learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that both the petitioners have been detained in custody since 09.08.2023 but charge has not yet been framed. As per offence report, 8 witnesses to be examined in the case as such it will take time to complete the trial of the case. Considering the length of detention, the petitioners may be enlarged on bail.

¶5Learned Additional P.P., on the other hand, has submitted that commercial quantity of narcotic substances were recovered from the residential campus of the petitioners. There is no explanation from the side of the petitioners why they kept such contraband items inside their campus. It is further submitted that the case was initiated on 09.08.2023 on the date of detection of the petitioners along with narcotic substance. After completion of investigation, charge sheet has been submitted on 05.01.2024. As commercial quantity of ganja was recovered from the homestead area of the petitioners, bail may not Page No.# 3/3 be considered.

¶6The scanned copy of trial court record is received which reveals that charge sheet has been submitted on 05.01.2024 against five accused. Accused Nur Ali is shown as absconder in the charge sheet and summons were issued to the absconder accused but police has failed to arrest the absconder accused. Under such backdrop, it cannot be said that there has been an inordinate delay for commencement of the trial.

¶7In view of the above, the bail application is rejected. However, the petitioners are at liberty to approach before the trial court seeking bail on subsequent stages of trial.

¶8The bail application stands disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010041392024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./550/2024 KHUDEJA KHATUN W/O LATE ABDUL KHALEK RESIDENT OF JAMUHANDAL WARD NO. 4, PO PADUM PUKHURI, PS AND DIST HOJAI, ASSAM 2: SRI ATAUR RAHMAN S/O LATE ABDUL KHALEK RESIDENT OF JAMUHANDAL WARD NO. 4 PO PADUM PUKHURI PS AND DIST HOJAI ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MD NURUL HASAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI