The Gauhati High Court dismissed a bail application filed by Anjan Nath in a special NDPS case. The Court refused to revisit its earlier order rejecting bail, citing sufficient connection to an absconder, involvement in a large quantity of contraband, and non-fulfillment of Section 37 NDPS Act factors.
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.# 1/2
GAHC010135282022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./1627/2022
ANJAN NATH
S/O RABINDRA NATH, VILL-DEFALALA, P.O. AND P.S.-PATHARKANDI, DIST-KARIMGANJ, ASSAM, PIN-788724
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P K ROY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
ORDER
12.09.2022
Heard Shri P. K. Roy, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. A. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner, namely, Shri Anjan Nath , who has filed this bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. praying for bail in connection with Special NDPS Case No. 122/2021 (GR Case No. 3617/2021) under Section 22(c)/25/29 of the NDPS Act being in judicial custody since 14.03.2022.
At the outset, the learned Senior Counsel has submitted that on an earlier occasion, this Court vide order dated 13.05.2022 passed in BA No. 792/2022 has rejected the prayer for bail.
It is submitted that the trial has just started and in the meantime, the petitioner
Page No.# 2/2
has spent sufficient time behind the bars. It is further submitted that he is a patient of diabetes with high sugar level and was admitted in the Silchar Medical College and Hospital and in the charge-sheet submitted by the police, there is no specific allegations leveled against the petitioner.
On the other hand, by referring to the scanned copy of the case records including the earlier order dated 13.05.2022, Shri B. Sarma, learned Addl. PP, Assam has submitted that this Court, on the earlier occasion had recorded the connection of the petitioner including his Call Details record with one Abdul Fatah who is an absconder.
The learned Addl. PP has also submitted that the petitioner worked in close connection with another accused Philip De as which is revealed from the case records. The quantity of the contraband involved which is a chemical drugs wherein the total quantity of 2,59,000 of tablets is also a relevant consideration.
In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to take a different view from the one taken on 13.05.2022.
Further, Section 37 of the NDPS Act lays down that before granting a bail, the relevant factors are that the Court should come to a satisfaction that prima facie the applicant is not guilty of the offence and also the applicant has to satisfy the Court that in case bail is granted, he is not likely to commit further offence. The aforesaid two factors do not seem to be fulfilled in the present case.
Accordingly, the prayer for bail stands rejected.
It is needless to say that proper medical treatment be afforded to the petitioner, if there is any such need.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner who has already been rejected on an earlier prayer under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Whether the petitioner satisfies the requirements under Section 37 of the NDPS Act for granting bail.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
ANJAN NATH
THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
