Justice Sailo allowed bail to a driver arrested under NDPS Act for alleged drug transportation. He relied on a Delhi HC judgment noting no drug recovery to grant bail, imposing a bond and reporting conditions.
Bail granted on bond of Rs. 1 lakh with local surety, subject to reporting conditions and prohibition on committing offenses.
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.# 1/5
GAHC030004082022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./14/2022
Shifar Uddin assam
VERSUS The State of Mizoram Aizawl
Advocate for the Petitioner : Ms Dinari T Azyu
Advocate for the Respondent : P.P./Addl.PP, Mizoram
ORDER
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO
13.09.2022
Heard Mr. K. Roland, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the
petitioner was arrested on 24.04.2022 by the police in connection with Sairang P.S
Case No. 10/2022 under Section 28/29 of the ND&PS Act, 1985. He submits that the
petitioner is a driver by profession and he used to drive vehicle for others from
Karimganj to Aizawl. On his way, he used to hitch a ride on any vehicle available going
back to Karimganj. On 24.04.2022, the petitioner was planning to go back to
Page No.# 2/5
Karimganj from Aizawl and at that moment, he met one Sh. Guljar Hussain, who was driving a Maruti Suzuki S-Presso vehicle bearing registration No. AS 10 E 9285 and was proceeding back Karimganj from Aizawl. Accordingly, he sought for a ride in the said vehicle and while they were heading back to Karimganj, on reaching Buichali bridge, they were apprehended by a police personnel for reasons not known to them.
[2.] Ms. Mary L. Khiangte, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor on the other hand submits that after diligent enquiry conducted by the police, it is revealed that the petitioner is a part of a well organized inter-state drug traffickers and that in order to uncover the drug trafficking, the petitioner is required to be kept in custody. She further submits that the petitioner is not a permanent resident of the State of Mizoram and therefore if they are released on bail, it would be very difficult to secure his presence during the trial. She thus submits that in view of the fact that the allegation against the petitioner being of serious nature, he may not be released on bail.
[3.] I have heard the submissions made by the learned counsels for the rival parties and I have perused the materials available on record, including the Case Diary produced by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor. From the materials available on record, it is seen that it is the case of the police that they received a reliable intelligence input on 24.04.2022 at around 4 pm that there was a movement of a large quantity of Methamphetamine within Aizawl city and the potential buyers for the said drugs were some non local persons coming in a vehicle from Silchar, Assam. The consignment of the drugs was to be picked up somewhere between Rangvamual and
Page No.# 3/5
Phunchawng to Buichali area. During the investigation, the potential buyer was believed to be travelling in a Maruti Suzuki S-Presso vehicle bearing registration No. AS 10 E 9285 (white colour). The said consignment was to be picked up by 2 (two) persons by the name of Guljar Hussain and Shifar Uddin (present petitioner). When the police party intercepted the said vehicle, they did not find any drugs in their possession. At around 10 pm, one truck bearing registration No. MZ 01 S 5512 coming from Aizawl side was strongly suspected to come with the consignment of the drugs and it was intercepted and the vehicle was detained. The driver of the truck and the passenger Lalsangpuii were taken to Sairang Police Station along with the vehicle but no drugs were recovered from their possession after thorough search. Thus, in connected with the Sairang P.S Case No. 10/2022, all together 6 (six) persons have been arrested. The present petitioner as already indicated herein above have been in custody since his arrest and detention on 25.04.2022.
[4.] From a perusal of the Case Diary, it is seen that the statements of the arrested persons have been recorded by the police under Section 161 Cr.PC wherein, there is indication that some contraband goods was scheduled to be transported during the relevant time. However, the fact remains that no recovery of the alleged drugs or any contraband substance has been made by the police, either from the person, the vehicle or any other place. The addition of Section 21 (c) of the ND&PS Act is also not based on any recovery made or weighment taken about any seized contraband substance. As stated in the application filed by the police, it was on the ground of
Page No.# 4/5
belief that the consignment sought to be intercepted was a large quantity and it was on that basis that the said Section was added. Therefore, the question which arises to be considered is as to whether the petitioner can be kept in custody solely on the basis of assumption that they are involved in the transportation of drugs/contraband substances while no recovery has been made from any quarter. The High Court of Delhi while considering Bail Application No. 1189/2020 (Amit Ranjan -Vs- Narcotics Control Bureau, Delhi) of the persons who were charged under Section 8 (c), 23 and 29 and also, 21 (c) of the ND&PS Act, vide judgment dated 23.05.2022 in the given facts of that case held that there having been no recovery of any alleged narcotic or psychotropic substances of a commercial quantity from the applicant, the Court was satisfied that there were no reasonable ground for belief that the applicant is not guilty of the commission of the offense particularly in view of the clean antecedent of the applicant. Accordingly, bail was granted to the applicant.
[5.] Similarly, in the present case, there no materials on record to show that the alleged drugs was recovered and also that the petitioner has past criminal record and a habitual offender, particularly in respect of the offenses under the ND&PS Act. Therefore, I am of the considered view that the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, subject to the following conditions:-
(1) Bail is granted to the petitioner on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 1 lakh with one local surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Court under ND&PS Act, Aizawl.
Page No.# 5/5
report to the police concerned as and when required to do so. Even otherwise, he shall report to the Sairang police station at every 15 days interval.
any offense punishable under any criminal law including the ND&PS Act, 1985.
of as allowed.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether petitioner can be kept in custody solely on assumption of drug transportation despite no recovery of contraband.
Whether petitioner is entitled to bail given lack of drug recovery and clean antecedent record.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Narcotics Control Bureau, DelhiRelied on¶25
Bail Application No. 1189/2020 (Amit Ranjan -Vs- Narcotics Control Bureau, Delhi)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shifar Uddin
The State of Mizoram
NELSON SAILO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
