Disposed¶26

Pulak Jyoti Kalita @ Janmoni v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC1 Apr 2025AB/2777/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gauhati High Court; AB/2777/2024; Mitali Thakuria, J.; order dated 02.04.2025; anticipatory/pre-arrest bail rejected; Section 483 BNSS 2023; Section 21(c) NDPS Act; Spl NDPS Case No. 165/2024; Nagaon P.S. Case No. 2535/2018; Pulak Jyoti Kalita @ Janmoni; alleged recovery of contraband from vehicle; absconder declaration; Special Judge No. 2 Nagaon orders dated 15.07.2024 and 24.07.2024; direction to seek regular bail within 15 days; no coercive action interim protection.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail denied; petitioner directed to appear before the learned Special Judge No. 2, Nagaon within 15 days with a regular bail application, and interim protection given that no coercive action shall be taken against him till then. ¶26

Pulak Jyoti Kalita @ Janmoni Vs the State of Assam — Narcotics (NDPS) | Gauhati HC (2025)

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010217992024

2025:GAU-AS:3892

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

¶5

Case No. : AB/2777/2024

¶6

PULAK JYOTI KALITA @ JANMONI S/O LATE HEMO KALITA R/O VILL- MAJPOTHORI SINGIACHUK P.S. SADAR DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM, REP BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR G SARMA, MR S DEKA

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

¶11

Page No.# 2/4

¶12

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Date : 02.04.2025

¶15

Heard Mr. S. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.

¶16

This is an application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused/petitioner, who is apprehending arrest in connection with Spl NDPS Case No. 165/2024, corresponding to Nagaon P.S. Case No. 2535/2018, under Section 21(c) of NDPS Act.

¶17

Scanned copy of the case record has already been received. Perused the same. Heard both sides.

¶18

It is submitted by Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the present accused/petitioner is innocent and he is no way connected in the alleged offence and nothing has been recovered from his conscious possession. The alleged recovery was made from a vehicle which was parked in front of his

¶19

Page No.# 3/4

¶20

house. Further he submitted that the accused/petitioner was though shown as an absconder in the charge-sheet, but the learned Special Judge No. 2, Nagaon, vide its order dated 15.07.2024, passed in Spl. NDPS Case No. 165/2024, considered that the police has no power to declare the person as an absconder and accordingly summon was issued against him. Moreover, the learned Special Judge No. 2, Nagaon, vide its order dated 24.07.2024, had rejected the prayer of the petitioner for granting pre-arrest bail and hence, the present anticipatory bail application has to be preferred seeking pre-arrest bail.

¶21

Mr. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submitted in this regard that huge quantity of contraband was recovered from the possession of the present accused/petitioner and the learned Special Judge No. 2, Nagaon also rejected his prayer for anticipatory bail considering the huge quantity of recovery of contraband and also considering the other aspects of the case. Further he submitted that the learned Special Judge No. 2, Nagaon only issued summon to the present petitioner and accordingly he may be directed to appear before the learned Special Judge No. 2, Nagaon and apply for regular bail.

¶22

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for both sides, nature and gravity of offence and also considering the order passed by the learned Special Judge No. 2, Nagaon, dated 15.07.2024, I find that this is not a fit case for granting the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the present accused/petitioner at this stage and hence, the same stands rejected. However, the petitioner is hereby directed to appear before the learned Special Judge No. 2, Nagaon within 15 (fifteen) days from the date of this order with an appropriate application for grant of regular bail, which may be considered by the

¶23

Page No.# 4/4

¶24

learned Court below in accordance with law.

¶25

Till then, it is provided that no coercive action shall be taken against the present accused/petitioner.

¶26

In terms of above, this anticipatory bail application stands disposed of.

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

Comparing Assistant

Pulak Jyoti Kalita @ Janmoni v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pulak Jyoti Kalita @ Janmoni v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Himangshu Choudhury Vs the State of Assam

Jakir Hussain @ Zakir Vs the State of Assam

Sri Pramod Kumar Vs Union of India

Bhakta Prasad Adhikari Vs the State of Assam

Maidul Ali Vs the State of Assam

Anwar Hussain Vs the State of Assam