Ajay Kumar Tiwari Vs the Union of India

Heard Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the NCB ( Special Public Prosecutor).

¶17

This is an application under Section 428 of BNSS, 2023, seeking pre-arrest bail in favour of the accused/petitioner i.e. Ajay Kumar

¶18

Page No.# 2/7

¶19

Tiwari, who is apprehending arrest in connection with NCB Crime No.09/2024, under Section 8(c), read with section 22(c) and 29 of NDPS Act, 1985.

¶20

The brief facts of the case is that an FIR was lodged on 28.09.2024 alleging inter-alia that on 27.09.2024, the Narcotics Control Bureau, Guwahati Zonal Unit seized 3.900 kgs of Methamphetamine tablets from the Maruti Eeco car bearing Registration No. WB-20-Z6596 at khusi Motor Works, VIP Road, Chachal, Khanapara, Assam. It is further alleged that the seized drug was recovered from the conscious possession of one Md. Nursafi and Sarif Chesam. Accordingly, a case has been registered.

¶21

In connection with the aforesaid case, notices under Section 67(c) of NDPS Act were issued to the petitioner on 24.02.2025 and 25.03.2025 to appear before the Investigating Officer on 03.04.2025 at the office of the Narcotics Control Bureau, Guwahati. Thus, apprehending arrest, the present anticipatory bail application has been filed.

¶22

Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is no way connected with the instant case and the contraband articles have been seized from a vehicle which is owned by one Saha Alam Thandar. He further submits that the said vehicle was repaired at his repair shop and after repairing, he had handed over the said vehicle to the owner. He accordingly submits that he has nothing to do in the instant FIR and hence, prays grant of the pre-arrest bail. In support of his submission that anticipatory bail can be granted in

¶23

Page No.# 3/7

¶24

case of offences relating out of NDPS, he relies upon the order of the Apex Court in the case of Kulwant Singh Vs. The State of Punjab in Criminal Appeal No.1558/2025 .

¶25

Per contra, Mr. S. C. Keyal, learned Special Public Prosecutor submits that in order to ascertain the role of the petitioner, notices under Section 67(c) of NDPS were issued to him on 24.02.2025 and 25.03.2025 to appear before the Investigating Officer, however, the petitioner did not appear before the Investigating Officer till date. He further submits that huge commercial quantity of contraband articles has been seized from the vehicle and the prosecution suspects the involvement of the petitioner as a middle man for providing the said from his repair shop for use in the offence alleged. He further submits that grant of anticipatory bail would seriously prejudice the ongoing investigation.

¶26

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and have perused the material available on record.

¶27

It appears that two notice dated 24.02.2025 and 25.03.2025 has been issued to the petitioner for appearing before the Investigating Officer in connection with the subject FIR.

¶28

9. Notice dated 24.02.2025 reads as hereunder:-

¶29

“ NCB F NO.: 07/NCB/GZU/Meth.Tab/09/2024/9856 Date: 24.02.2025 NOTICE UNDER SECTION 67(c) OF THE NDPS ACT, 1985 (AS AMENDED)

To,

Ajay Tiwari,

Page No.# 4/7

C/o-Ganpati Motors,

¶34

Mandani Apartment, 14/1 T. N.

¶35

Chatterjee Street Kolkata-700090

¶36

In exercise of the powers conferred under section 67 (C) of NDPS Act, 1985 (as amended), I hereby inform you that during the investigation of Case No (NCB Crime No) 09/2024 dated 26.09.2024 u/s 8(c) r/w 22 (c) & 29 of NDPS Act, 1985 (as amended) registered at NCB, Guwahati Zonal Unit, it is revealed that there are reasonable grounds to question you to ascertain facts and circumstances from you, in relation to the present investigation. Hence you are directed to appear before investigating officer at 1000 hrs. on 06.03.2025 at office of Narcotics Control Bureau, Guwahati

¶37

Failure to attend/comply with this Notice can render you liable for action under law.

¶38

Sanjit Kumar Inspector Narcotics Control Bureau”

¶39

Reading of the aforesaid notice, it is apparent that the petitioner has been asked to appear before the Investigating Officer on 06.03.2025 in relation to the present investigation for questioning in order to ascertain facts and circumstances of the case from him. It further appears that it is clearly mentioned in the notice that failure to attend or comply with this notice would render the petitioner liable for action under law. However, instead of appearing on the date fixed, the petitioner by letter dated 04.03.2025 submitted his reply stating that he had pruchased the subject vehicle in the month of February/March, 2024 for a consideration price of Rs. 1,27,000/- plus repairing cost extra from one Saha Alam Thandar and after taking custody of the said vehicle, he sold the said vehicle to one Maulana Safiuddin. The petitioner further indicated in the said reply that since he has lost his uncle on 14.02.2025, he is not in a position to travel to Guwahati and accordingly, has given his written reply in this regard.

¶40

Apt also to reproduce the Notice dated 25.03.2025 which is

¶41

Page No.# 5/7

¶42

reads as hereunder:-

¶43

“ NCB F NO.: 07/NCB/GZU/Meth.Tab/09/2024/10044 Date: 25.03.2025

¶44

NOTICE UNDER SECTION 67(c) OF THE NDPS ACT. 1985 (AS AMENDED)

¶45

To,

¶46

Ajay Tiwari,

¶47

C/o- Ganpati Motors,

¶48

Mandani Apartment, 14/1 T. N.

¶49

Chatterjee Street Kolkata-700090 [email protected]

¶50

In exercise of the powers conferred under section 67 (C) of NDPS Act, 1985 (as amended), I hereby inform you that during the investigation of Case No (NCB Crime No) 09/2024 dated 26.09.2024 u/s 8(c) r/w 22 (c) & 29 of NDPS Act, 1985 (as amended) registered at NCB, Guwahati Zonal Unit, it is revealed that there are reasonable grounds to question you to ascertain facts and circumstances from you, in relation to the present investigation. Hence you are directed to appear before investigating officer at 1000 hrs. on 03.04.2025 at office of Narcotics Control Bureau, Guwahati

¶51

Failure to attend/comply with this Notice can render you liable for action under law.

¶52

Narcotics Control Bureau”

¶53

Reading of the aforesaid notice, it is apparent that since the petitioner failed to appear on the earlier date fixed, he was again asked to appear before the Investigating Officer on 03.04.2025 for questioning in order to ascertain the facts and circumstances of the case from him. It appears that the petitioner by reply dated 01.04.2025 once again intimated to the Investigating Officer that due to the death of his uncle, he shall not be able to appear on the fixed

¶54

Page No.# 6/7

¶55

date.

¶56

It appears from the report of Narcotics Control Bureau submitted by the Inspector Sanjit Kumar, which is placed before this Court by Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Special Public Prosecutor that huge commercial quantity of contraband articles have been seized from the vehicle seized. It further appears from the said report that the petitioner is suspected to be the middleman for providing the vehicle from which the contraband articles were seized. It further appears that it is suspected that the petitioner is an active member of inter-state drug syndicate. It further appears from the report that though the stand of the petitioner is that he had sold the vehicle to one Manipur based person and NOC was also obtained but the said vehicle was not registered at Manipur and is still in the name of Saha Alam Thandar. It is apparent from the said report that in order to ascertain the role of the petitioner notices under Section 67(c) have been issued to the petitioner on two occasions, however, on both the occasions, the petitioner has not appeared before the Investigating Officer at Guwahati.

¶57

Transpired thus, that despite notices being sent to the petitioner for appearing before the Investigating Officer for questioning in order to ascertain the facts and circumstances of the alleged offence, the petitioner by giving the same excuses of the death of his uncle has not appeared before the Investigating Officer. That apart, it is apparent from the report that there is prima-facie involvement of the petitioner in the alleged offence. It further appears that the petitioner is not co-

¶58

Page No.# 7/7

¶59

operating with the investigation. It further appears that the investigation is at a crucial stage. Thus, it is essential to unearth the truth.

¶60

This Court cannot be unmindful of the fact that the instant anticipatory bail application is relating to an offence under section 22(c) of the NDPS Act, 1985. In the case of State of Haryana Vs Samarth Kumar reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 2087 , the Apex Court has held that in cases arising out of offences under the NDPS Act to grant anticipatory bail is not really warranted. Similarly, in the case of Anarul SK Vs. State of West Bengal in Special Leave to appeal in Criminal No.12621/2024 , the Apex Court has held that to grant anticipatory bail in cases involving NDPS is a “very serious” issue and “unheard of”.

¶61

Viewed thus, I am of the unhesitant view that the anticipatory bail as sought for cannot be granted at this stage.

¶62

Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stands rejected and dismissed.

¶63

JUDGE

¶64

Comparing Assistant

Ajay Kumar Tiwari v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar Tiwari v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs. Binaya Sinha Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Lal Mahmud and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Moniruddin Mondal and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Ismail Hussain Vs the State of Assam

Gautam Rai Vs Union of India

Dinendra Biswas Vs the Union of India and 7 Ors.