This bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. was rejected. The Court held that the investigation into the narcotics offense was still ongoing and sufficient materials had been collected, so granting bail at this stage would misdirect the investigation.
Bail petition rejected; Case Diary returned forthwith.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC040003952022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)
Case No. : BA 30/2022
1:Nalchand Ali S/o Md. Sukur Ali, R/o Vill. Mowamari, PO Ramapara, PS Baghbar, District Barpeta, Assam
VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF AP Represented by Sp. PP (AP)
Advocate for the Petitioner : T T Tara
Advocate for the Respondent : O. Pada, SPL.P.P.
BEFORE
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN
ORDER
Date : 25-04-2022
Heard Mr. J. Jini, learned counsel for the accused and also heard Mr. O. Pada, learned Standing counsel SIT Crime Branch.
This application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is preferred by one Shri Nalchand Ali praying for grant of bail to the accused Shri Maynal Haque who has been languishing in jail hazot in connection with Itanagar C. B.
Page No.# 2/3
P.S. Case No.12/2020 under Section 22 (b)/27 (a)/27 (A) of NDPS Act.
The allegation against the accused is that on 28.05.2020, the informant, namely, Inspector Techi Vijay of Crime Branch P.S. (SIT) conducted search in the house of Smti. Yayi Lendo Jomoh and one Shri Oyar Panor and Smti. Yayi Lendo Jomoh was found in dealing with suspected drugs and after conducting search in her house, some contraband substances weighing 195 gm. (approx.) was found and the same was seized after observing legal formalities.
Mr. Jini, learned counsel for the accused submits that the accused is behind the bar for the last 116 days and except the statement of coaccused and his own statement, there is no other incriminating materials against him and therefore, Mr. Jini, learned counsel for the accused contended to allow the bail petition.
On the other hand, Mr. O. Pada, learned Standing counsel for the Crime Branch, by producing the Case Diary before this Court submits that the I.O. has collected sufficient materials in respect of the allegation levelled against the accused which are serious in nature. It is also pointed out that the case has been registered under Section 27 (a) and 27 (A) NDPS Act and also under Section 22 (b) which are serious in nature. Therefore, Mr. O. Pada, learned Standing counsel for the Crime Branch contended to dismiss the petition.
Having heard the submission of learned Advocates of both the sides, I have carefully gone through the Case Diary produced before this Court. It appears that the I.O. of the case has collected sufficient materials in
Page No.# 3/3
respect of the allegation levelled in the FIR. Further, it appears that investigation is still going on and enlarging the accused on bail, at this stage, will misdirect the investigation.
Considering the submission of learned Advocates of both the sides and also considering materials so far collected in the Case Diary, this bail petition stands rejected, at this stage.
Returned the Case Diary, forthwith.
This bail application stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a NDPS case where investigation is still ongoing and sufficient materials have been collected.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Nalchand Ali
The State of Assam
Robin Phukan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
