Hare Krishna Sarkar v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC16 Jun 2025Bail Appln./1527/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

NDPS Act bail; Section 483 BNSS 2023; ganja commercial quantity 25.230 Kgs; prolonged detention over one year; no witnesses examined, trial culmination remote; driver of seized vehicle; humanitarian/medical grounds (father with cancer); bail conditions and cancellation clause; Gauhati High Court; Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund; 2025; Udalguri/BTR; Dalgaon P.S. Case No. 44/2024.

What did the court decide?

Conditional bail granted: bail bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two local suitable sureties of like amount, subject to satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and three conditions (refrain from alleged activities; co-operate with the trial and not leave Court jurisdiction without prior permission till trial completion; no threats to witnesses or tampering with evidence); bail liable to immediate cancellation on breach of any condition.

Hare Krishna Sarkar Vs the State of Assam — Narcotics (NDPS) | Gauhati HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner — in custody since 26.02.2024, with none of the fifteen enlisted witnesses examined and trial culmination appearing remote — should be released on bail. +1 more

¶¶18

Court's answer

Bail granted: the petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two local suitable sureties of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.

¶¶27

Ratio / Principle

The Court considered the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, noting that the petitioner's father is ailing, having scrutinised the medical documents annexed with the petition.

¶¶24

Key takeaways

Condition (i): the petitioner shall refrain from such activities with which he is alleged.ratio¶¶28
Condition (ii): the petitioner shall co-operate with the trial and not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission, till completion of the trial.ratio¶¶29
Condition (iii): the petitioner shall not exercise threats to the witnesses or tamper with the evidence.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund), by order dated 17.06.2025 in Bail Appln./1527/2025, allowed a Section 483 BNSS 2023 bail application by Hare Krishna Sarkar, detained since 26.02.2024 in Special (N) Case No. 19/2024 (Dalgaon P.S. Case No. 44/2024; Sections 20(b)(ii)(c)/29, NDPS Act 1985). Counsel highlighted detention exceeding 1 year 3 months, failure to examine any of fifteen enlisted witnesses, the petitioner's role as mere driver of the seized vehicle, and his father's terminal cancer; the earlier Trial Court bail rejection dated 24.04.2025 rested only on the 25.230 Kgs commercial quantity of ganja. Bail was fixed at Rs. 1,00,000/- with two local sureties, subject to conditions of desisting from the alleged activity, co-operating with the trial and staying within Court jurisdiction until its completion, and not threatening witnesses or tampering with evidence, with liberty to cancel bail immediately upon breach; the application was disposed of.

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010096692025

2025:GAU-AS:7995

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

¶5

Case No. : Bail Appln./1527/2025

¶6

HARE KRISHNA SARKAR S/O- SWAPAN SARKAR, R/O- VILLAGE- NAMATI (KHA), P.S- MAZBAT, DIST.-UDALGURI (BTR), ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PP, ASSAM

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S S S RAHMAN, MR. S.S.A RAHMAN,MS S Z HAYAT,MS B H SHIRIN

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

¶11

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND

¶12

ORDER

¶13

17.06.2025

¶14

1. Heard Mr. S.S.A. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶15

2. This application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Hare Krishna

¶16

Page No.# 2/4

¶17

Sarkar, who has been behind the bars since 26.02.2024 in connection with Special (N) Case No. 19/2024, arising out of Dalgaon P.S. Case No. 44/2024 under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c)/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

¶18

3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has been languishing in the jail for more than 01 year 3 months and not a single witness has been examined so far. The petitioner is not involved in the case. He was the driver of the vehicle seized in connection with this case. He was not aware of the transportation of ganja.

¶19

4. It is further submitted that there are fifteen (15) witnesses cited as enlisted witnesses in the charge sheet and not even a single witness has been examined so far. Culmination of trial appears to be remote.

¶20

5. It is further submitted that the petitioner had earlier applied for bail before the learned Trial Court, which was rejected by the said Court, vide order dated 24.04.2025 without recording any reasons, only on the basis of the observations that 25.230 Kgs of ganja, which is of commercial quantity. The petitioner has annexed a photograph of his father as Annexure-4 and other medical documents as Annexure-5 of the petition, which reflects that the petitioner’s father is on the death bed as he is suffering from cancer. The petitioner is only 22 years old and he is the sole bread earner of the family. His mother is also ailing at present.

¶21

6. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. P.S. Lahkar has raised serious objections stating that the petitioner was transporting commercial quantities of ganja. The documents submitted by the petitioner are dated 03.02.2025 and at this juncture the documents cannot be relied upon.

¶22

Page No.# 3/4

¶23

7. I have considered the submissions at the bar with circumspection.

¶24

8. I have also considered the peculiar facts and circumstances of this present case. The petitioner’s father is ailing.

¶25

9. I have also scrutinised the medical documents annexed along with the petition.

¶26

10. I have considered the submissions that the petitioner is willing to co-operate with the trial and to abide by any stringent bail conditions if imposed upon him.

¶27

11. In the wake of the foregoing discussions and considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, petition is allowed. The above-named petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only)with two local suitable sureties of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court under the following conditions that:-

¶28

(i) The petitioner shall refrain from such activities with which he is alleged;

¶29

(ii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the trial and not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission, till completion of the trial; and

¶30

(iii) The petitioner shall not exercise threats to the witnesses or tamper with the evidence.

¶31

12. On breach of any of the bail conditions, learned Court is at liberty

¶32

Page No.# 4/4

¶33

to immediately cancel the bail granted to the petitioner.

¶34

13. This bail application is accordingly disposed of.

¶35

JUDGE