Aga HC rejected a bail application in a narcotics case involving commercial quantities of poppy plants cultivated on accused lands, ruling that granting bail would likely impede a smooth and fair speedy trial despite detention exceeding 200 days.
Bail application of the accused petitioners stands rejected.
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.# 1/4
GAHC010101912022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case : Bail Appln./1014/2022
BISWANATH DAS AND 3 ORS. S/O KANIK DAS R/O NO. 1 DHUPURI MANIKPUR P.S. MANIKPUR DIST. BONGAIGAON ASSAM 2: SUSHIL DAS S/O NESARU RAM DAS R/O NO. 1 DHUPURI MANIKPUR P.S. MANIKPUR DIST. BONGAIGAON ASSAM
3: DEBEN DAS S/O NESARU RAM DAS R/O NO. 1 DHUPURI MANIKPUR P.S. MANIKPUR DIST. BONGAIGAON ASSAM
4: ATUL CHANDRA DAS @ ATUL DAS S/O JONAKI MOHAN DAS R/O NO. 1 DHUPURI MANIKPUR P.S. MANIKPUR DIST. BONGAIGAON ASSAM VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
Page No.# 2/4
REP. BY THE PP ASSAM
-----------Advocate for : MR. A BARUAH Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR
ORDER
20.07.2022
Heard Ms. T. Som, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. B. B. Gogoi, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State/respondent.
By this petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the petitioners, namely, 1. Biswanath Das 2. Sushil Das 3. Deben Das 4. Atul Chandra Das @ Atul Das have prayed for grant of bail in connection with Manikpur PS Case No. 82/2020 registered under Section 18 (B) and added Section 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985.
The scanned copy of case record, as called for, is placed before the Court.
Ms. T. Som, learned counsel appearing for the accused petitioners, submits that in the instant charge-sheeted case, the accused persons are in judicial custody for more than 200 (two hundred) days despite being absolutely innocent. According to Ms. Som, the accused petitioners are not the main accused persons and one person, namely, Bhabesh Das, who is a resident of Cooch Bihar, West Bengal took the advantage of illiteracy of the accused petitioners and committed the alleged offences in their names. Ms. Som further submits that this fact has been stated in their forwarding report. It is also
Page No.# 3/4
submitted that the charge-sheet in the case was submitted on 11.04.1022, that is, after the accused persons passed through the mandatory period of detention of 90 days and on that ground the prime accused Bhabesh Das was released on bail in BA No. 820/2022. Ms. Som vehemently submits that the accused petitioners may be directed to be released on bail maintaining parity in order.
Vehemently opposing the bail application, Mr. B. B. Gogoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submits that an application has already been filed by the State for cancellation of the bail granted to the accused Bhabesh Das which is presently pending for consideration of this Court and as such, in the backdrop of facts and evidence, so far collected in the case, the liberty of bail may not be granted to the accused petitioners.
The case relates to recovery and seizure of 100 kg of poppy plant from the lands of the accused petitioner No.1, 120 kg of suspected poppy Plant from the land of the accused petitioner No.2, 350 kg of suspected poppy plant from the accused petitioner Nos.3 and 4.
It is noticed that the accused petitioners are in judicial custody since 01.01.2022, that is, for 200 days.
A perusal of the case record reveals that the police seized 100 kg of poppy plant from the lands of the accused petitioner No.1, 120 kg of suspected poppy Plant from the land of the accused petitioner No.2, 350 kg of suspected poppy plant from the accused petitioner No.3 and 4. On morphological examination of the bulbs and stems as well as ultra-structure examination of the seeds inside the bulbs, reported the same to be poppy plants. The quantity of poppy plants aforementioned amounts to commercial quantity under the N.D.P.S. Act.
After completion of investigation, the police submitted charge-sheet
Page No.# 4/4
under Section 18(b)/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act against the present accused petitioners and seven others vide order dated 18.04.022. Accused person, namely, Hitish Das is already released on bail. The case is presently at its appearance stage for the accused persons who are on bail.
Therefore, upon consideration of the implicating materials available on the case diary and at the aforesaid stage of the case, this Court is of the opinion that if the liberty of bail is granted to the accused persons in such a case involving commercial quantity of poppy straws collected from their cultivation fields a smooth and fair speedy trial of the case may likely to be adversely affected.
Therefore, the bail application stands rejected.
Return the case diary.
This disposes of the bail application.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to accused persons detained in judicial custody for over 200 days in a commercial quantity narcotics case.
Whether a smooth and speedy trial would be adversely affected if bail is granted to accused persons in a case involving cultivation of poppy plants.
Whether parity in bail order should be maintained where a co-accused has already been released on bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
BISWANATH DAS AND 3 ORS.
THE STATE OF ASSAM
AJIT BORTHAKUR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
