The Gauhati High Court dismissed a bail application filed by an accused facing trial for offences under Section 22(c) of the NDPS Act. The court held that the accused failed to satisfy the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act regarding guilt and risk of flight, and thus bail was not a fit case in this instance.
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
GAHC010189672022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./2378/2022
RAHUL PRASAD
S/O- LATE SANJIT PRASAD, R/O- WARD NO. 16, G.T.B. ROAD, P.S. AND DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE P.P., ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S M T CHISTIE
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN
ORDER
Date : 07-12-2022
Heard Mr. P Thakuria, learned counsel for the accused and also heard Mr. BB Gogoi, learned Addl. PP, Assam.
This application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., is filed by accused Rahul Prasad, who is languishing jail hajot in connection with Special Case No.51/2022 in Dhubri PS Case No.1675/2021, under section 21(B)/21(C)
Page No.# 2/3
NDPS Act, for grant of bail.
The aforementioned case has been registered on the basis of one FIR lodged by SI Chankya Das, SI Dhubri PS on 17.10.2021, to the effect that acting on a tip off they have conducted search in the house of one Rahul Prasad and recovered 1280 no’s of 160 stripes of Pyeevon Spas Plus capsules, 30 no’s (3 stripes) of Nitrosun 10 Tablets, one packet white color powdery substance suspected to be cocaine, weighing 89 gms, one packet (green colour polythene) having white colour powdery substance suspected to be cocaine weighing 200 gram, and one bag (teal colour) having capsule tablets and cocaine (suspected).
Upon the said FIR, the O/C Dhubi PS registered Dhubri PS Case No.1675/2021, and investigated the same and upon completion of investigation, laid charge sheet being CS No.1101/2021, dated 29.12.2021, against the present accused Rahul Prasad and two other accused to stand trial under section 22(c) NDPS Act.
Thereafter the learned court below has framed charge against all the three accused under section 22(c) NDPS Act and on being read and explained over, the accused pleaded not guilty to the same, and thereafter, the learned court below has examined as many as 8 witnesses, out of 9 witnesses, cited in the charge sheet.
The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the accused is behind the bar for more than 1 year and the seizure witnesses have not supported the prosecution version and therefore, it is contended to allow this petition.
On other hand, Mr. RJ Baruah, learned Addl. PP submits that last witness was examined by the learned court below on 19.09.2022 and in the meantime, the learned court below might have completed examination of all the witnesses and that the evidence of PW- 4 & 5 have implicated the
Page No.# 3/3
present accused with the offence charged and at the flag end of trial and if the accused is enlarged on bail, then there will be delay in disposed of the case, and therefore, Mr. Baruah contended to dismiss the petition.
Having heard the submissions of learned Advocates of both the sides, I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and also gone through the scanned copy of the record received from the learned court below.
From the evidence so far brought on record, specially from the evidence of Pw-4 & 5, and also from the submissions of the learned counsel for the accused, this Court is unable to derive satisfaction that there is no reasonable ground to believe that the accused is not guilty of the offence under section 22(c), and that he will not commit similar offence while on bail.
As the bar of section 37 of the NDPS Act could not be satisfied by the accused from the materials available on record, this Court is of the view that this is not a fit case where the privilege of bail can be extended to the accused and accordingly the petition stands dismissed.
However, the learned court below is directed to complete the trial at the earliest possible time, preferably within a period of 1 (one) month from today and if necessary, the learned court below can take recourse to section 309(1) Cr.P.C.
In terms of the above, this BA stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail can be granted under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a trial under Section 22(c) of the NDPS Act when the bar under Section 37 is not satisfied.
Whether the court below has completed the trial within a reasonable time.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Rahul Prasad
The State of Assam
Robin Phukan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
