VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Gauhati High Court 2024 › High Court of Gauhati

Lombit Moran v. The State of Assam

Rejected
Court
High Court of Gauhati
Decided
19 February 2024
Bench
Susmita Phukan Khaundauthor
Case no.
Bail Appln. 4425/2023

Judgment

ORDER

20.02.2024 Heard Mr N K Murry, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Lombit Moran.

¶2The petitioner has filed this application under Section 439 CrPC, with prayer for bail, as he is behind bars since 08.01.2023, in connection with Special NDPS Case No. 43/2023, arising out of Bokajan PS Case No. 03/2023, registered under Sections 21(C)/29 of the NDPS Act (GR Case No. 06/2023). Page No.# 2/3

¶3Heard Mr M P Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

¶4It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that there is no prima facie case against the petitioner. The witnesses have already been examined. The IO is yet to be examined. As the petitioner is behind bars for 395 days, his personal liberty has been curtailed. Although it is alleged that 607.54 grams of heroin was recovered from his possession, the procedural lapse entitles the petitioner to bail. The learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for admitting the petitioner to bail.

¶5The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised objection stating that the case is at the fag end of trial. At this juncture, trial may be adversely affected if the petitioner is enlarged on bail. 7 witnesses have been examined in connection with this case. Only the IO is to be examined. The amount of heroin recovered weighs 607.54 grams, which is a commercial quantity.

¶6I have considered the submissions at the Bar with circumspection.

¶7Indeed, the case is at the fag end of trial.

¶8It appears that the trial may be adversely affected if the petitioner is admitted to bail. The personal liberty of the petitioner cannot be said to be curtailed, as trial has been procrastinated. This is a case where the trial is progressing at a regular pace. The rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, acts as an embargo. There is no prima facie case to admit the petitioner to bail. Page No.# 3/3

¶9Petition is rejected at this stage.

¶10Meanwhile, learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Case details

Parties and counsel

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010274632023 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./4425/2023 LOMBIT MORAN S/O LT. DONDESWAR MORAN PERMANENT R/O OF VILL CHOTO HAPJAN TEA ESTTATE P.O. AND P.S. MAKUM DIST. TINSUKIA ASSAM PIN 786170 PRESENTLY RESIDING AT 4 MILE NEAR LOTHA CHURCH P.S DIPHU PAR DIST CHUMUKEDIMA NAGALAND PIN 79115 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N K MURRY Advocate for the Respondent : MR. M P GOSWAMI(ADDL.PP, ASSAM) BEFORE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND

Source: High Court of Gauhati, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.