This disposal orders dismissed the applicant's bail application filed in connection with a pending NDPS trial where heroin was seized. Deeming the accused failed to satisfy Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
The bail application was not granted; the petitioner remains in custody.
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
GAHC010088512026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./1186/2026
YUMNAM RAJESH SINGH ALIAS RAJESH YUMNAM S/O YUMNAM GULAPI SINGH A RESIDENT OF VILL.- ITHAI KHUNOU, IMPHAIL, P.S.- KUMBI, DIST.- BISHNUPUR, MANIPUR, INDIA.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M A I HUSSAIN, MD A ISLAM
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR
ORDER
08.06.2026
Heard Mr. M.A.I. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr.
K.K. Das, learned APP for the State.
The TCR have been received.
Page No.# 2/3
The petitioner was arrested on 08.09.2025 in connection with Dispur P.S. Case No. 752/2025, which has culminated in NDPS Case No. 13/2026, pending before the learned Special Judge (NDPS), Kamrup (M), wherein charge has been framed under Section 21(c) of the NDPS Act, 1985.
The charge-sheet was submitted on 18.12.2025 and charges were framed on 17.02.2026. Thereafter, the trial has not progressed.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the presence of the petitioner at the place of seizure of the contraband is disputed and therefore, he deserves the privilege of bail at this stage. It has further been submitted that although the matter was fixed on three different dates after framing of the trial has not proceeded any further.
The learned APP has submitted that the alleged recovery involves a commercial quantity of heroin and that the relevant materials on record indicate that the petitioner was apprehended at the time of seizure. Accordingly, it has been prayed that the privilege of bail ought not to be granted to the petitioner at this stage of the trial.
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP. Having regard to the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, I am of the considered view that the petitioner has failed to satisfy the conditions prescribed
Page No.# 3/3
therein. Accordingly, I do not find it to be a fit case for granting the privilege of bail to the petitioner at this stage.
Accordingly, this bail application stands dismissed.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant satisfied the conditions for bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act given the disputed presence at seizure site and commercial quantity of drugs.
Whether the bail application can be granted given the non-progression of the trial despite multiple date fixes.
Whether the allegations of being apprehended at the time of seizure preclude bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
YUMNAM RAJESH SINGH ALIAS RAJESH YUMNAM
THE STATE OF ASSAM
RAJESH MAZUMDAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
