Allowed

Ratna Ram and Anr. v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC19 Jul 2022Bail Appln./1063/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court allowed a bail application by two accused persons alleged to be involved in an illegal ganja transport case. Relying on Supreme Court precedents and noting the insufficiency of non-admissible confessional statements, the Court ordered their release on bail with two sureties, subject to specific conditions, despite pending investigation.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail of Rs. 50,000 each with two sureties of like amount, subject to appearing in court, not influencing witnesses, refraining from similar offences, and providing identity documents.

Ratna Ram and Anr. Vs the State of Assam — Narcotics (NDPS) | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010088802022

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : Bail Appln./1063/2022

¶5

RATNA RAM AND ANR. S/O JUJA - RAM R/O VILL- DUNGARWARA P.S. BAGODA, DIST. JALORE RAJASTHAN

¶6

2: ASHU RAM S/O KANA RAM R/O VILL- MAOKHORA P.S. ARADA DIST. JALORE RAJASTHAN VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE LD. PP, ASSAM

¶7

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS J SAIKIA

¶8

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶9

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR

¶10

ORDER

¶11

19.07.2022

¶12

Heard Mr. M.K. Das, learned counsel for the accused petitioners as well as

¶13

Page No.# 2/5

¶14

Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State respondent.

¶15

By this petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the accused-petitioners, namely 1. Ratna Ram and 2. Ashu Ram have prayed for grant of bail in connection with Special N.D.P.S. Case No. 26/2021 arising out of Gossaigaon P.S. Case No. 288/2021 u/s 120B/420/34 of the IPC read with Section 22(c) of the N.D.P.S., Act, 1985.

¶16

The scanned copy of the case record along with a status report on the trial of the case, as called for, is placed before the Court.

¶17

Mr. M.K. Das, learned counsel appearing for the accused petitioners, submits that the accused persons have been detained in judicial custody for 224 days despite no evidence that contraband was seized from their possession. Mr. Das further submits that prior to their arrest in connection with the instant case, they were arrested in connection with Gossaigaon P.S. Case No. 305/2021 under Sections 120B/420/417/34 of the IPC read with Sections 17(b)/18(b)/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act and immediately after their release in the said case on bail by the learned Court below, the police rearrested them as shown arrested, in connection with the instant case. Mr. Das vehemently submits that the accused petitioners, despite being absolutely innocent, have been languishing in jail for a prolonged period. Mr. Das also submits that co-accused namely, Tarifur Rahman, the owner of the vehicle, has already been enlarged on bail by the learned Sessions Judge, Kokrajhar vide order, dated 23.12.2021 and therefore, maintaining parity in order, the present two innocent accused petitioners may also be directed to be released on bail. In support of his submission, Mr. Das relied on the judgments rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of

¶18

Page No.# 3/5

¶19

India Vs. Bal Mukund & ors., reported in (2009) 12 SCC 161; Dipakbhai Jagdishchandra Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and anr., reported in (2019) 16 SCC 547 and Kamaljit Singh Vs. State of Punjab and anr., reported in (2005) 7 SCC 226.

¶20

Opposing the bail application, Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, submits that both the accused petitioners and 7 others are part charge-sheeted keeping further investigation pending in respect of one accused, namely Ajit Singh under Sections 120B/420/34 of the IPC read with Section 22(c) of the N.D.P.S. Act for illegally transporting 572.8 k.g. of ganja by a truck. Further, Mr. Baruah submits that as the case is presently pending for consideration of charges, the bail application may not be considered favourably.

¶21

The F.I.R. lodged by S.I. Ganesh Sarkar before the Officer-in-Charge, Gossaigaon P.S., reveals the allegation that based on secret information regarding carrying of illegal ganja by a truck bearing registration No. NL-01-N4149 (twelve wheeler), on 30.05.2021 at about 4.30 a.m., police conducted naka checking at NH 31 C Srirampur Jum and after detaining the said vehicle, brought to Simultapu O.P. for checking. On checking of the vehicle, one secret chamber was found inside the body, wherefrom 51 packets of suspected ganja weighing 572.800 k.g. were recovered and seized in presence of witnesses. On interrogation of the driver of the vehicle, it was found that the suspected ganja was loaded in Beltola, Guwahati for delivery at Siliguri and that the kingpins behind this illegal business were one Md. Zakir Hussain and Abdul Jalil.

¶22

It is noticed that both the accused petitioners are in judicial custody in connection with the instant case since 09.12.2021. The co-accused persons, namely Abdul Jalil and Mujakkir Hussain Barbhuyan were granted bail on

¶23

Page No.# 4/5

¶24

10.12.2021 and 18.02.2022 respectively.

¶25

The present accused petitioners are shown arrested and charge-sheeted in the case.

¶26

The case diary reveals that the present 2(two) accused petitioners, who are labourers, were engaged for loading the seized ganja in the truck based on the confessional statements of some of the co-accused persons recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., which are not admissible in evidence being hit by Section 25 of the Evidence Act. Besides the proposition of law laid in Dipakbhai case (supra), even in the case of Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamil Nadu in Criminal Appeal No. 152/2013, the Honb’le Supreme Court disapproved reliance on the co-accused’s statements recorded under Section 67 of the N.D.P.S. Act for the purpose of conviction of the accused.

¶27

Therefore, in the opinion of this Court, based on the principles laid by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, referred to above and having considered the nature of evidence collected during investigation, peculiar to the accused petitioners, their further continuation of detention in judicial custody will not be necessary for the purpose of trial of the case.

¶28

Accordingly, it is provided that each of the accused petitioners, named above, shall be released on bail of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) only with 2(two) sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act), Kokrajhar subject to the following conditions-

¶29

i) That the accused/petitioners shall continue to appear before the learned trial Court on all dates to be fixed from time to time till the case is disposed of;

¶30

Page No.# 5/5

¶31

ii) That the accused/petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court;

¶32

iii) That the accused/petitioners shall refrain from committing any offences similar to the one of which they are accused or suspected of commission;

¶33

iv) That out of the two bailors, one must be a government servant subject to verification of the relevant documents, if deemed necessary and after such verification, the learned Court below shall return the original documents retaining legible scanned copy thereof on record for future reference; and

¶34

v) That the accused/petitioners and their bailors shall produce their Voter Identity Card/ Passport/Permanent Residential Certificate, whatever is available at the time of submission of the bail bond for satisfaction of the learned Court below regarding their identity and address and then return the same retaining photocopy thereof on record.

¶35

This disposes of the bail application.

¶36

JUDGE

¶37

Comparing Assistant

Ratna Ram and Anr. v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ratna Ram and Anr. v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Zenaid Uddin Ahmed @ Md. Zunaid Uddin Ahmed Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Papu Giri Vs the State of Assam

Faizul Islam Vs the State of Assam

Raju Debnath Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Subodh Kumar Vs the State of Assam

Md. Shariful Islam Vs the State of Assam