Haren Das Vs the State of Assam — Narcotics (NDPS) | Gauhati HC (2026)

Haren Das Vs the State of Assam — Narcotics (NDPS) | Gauhati HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail granted on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court, subject to conditions: petitioner shall not leave the Trial Court's jurisdiction during the trial without permission, shall participate regularly in the trial, and shall not influence witnesses.

Issue for consideration

Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner, arrested on 01.02.2026 in connection with NDPS Case No. 13/2026 (arising out of Nalbari P.S. Case No. 20/2026) under Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act, the application being filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 read with Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Court's answer

Although there is incriminating material against the accused, having regard to the period of detention of 120 days, the fact of eminent commencement of the trial and the personal circumstances of the accused, further detention of the petitioner is not considered necessary.

Ratio / Principle

The bail application is allowed on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each of the like amount, subject to the conditions that the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Trial Court during the pendency of the trial without permission, shall participate regularly in the trial, and shall not try to influence the witnesses in any manner.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, J.) allowed a regular bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 read with Section 37 of the NDPS Act by Haren Das, arrested on 01.02.2026 in NDPS Case No. 13/2026, arising out of Nalbari P.S. Case No. 20/2026 under Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act, following seizure of 11.76 grams of heroin from his possession. His earlier bail application had been rejected by the learned Special Judge, NDPS, Nalbari on 17.03.2026 in Criminal Misc Case No. 27/2026. Counsel for the petitioner urged that the quantity was intermediate, only slightly above the 5-gram small-quantity threshold, and highlighted the petitioner's family circumstances and 120 days' continuous detention since 11.02.2026, with the charge sheet submitted, charges framed and trial imminent. The State opposed, noting direct recovery from the petitioner's possession. Holding that, although incriminating material existed, further detention was not considered necessary in view of the 120-day detention, the eminent commencement of trial and the accused's personal circumstances, the Court allowed bail on a bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two like sureties, imposing conditions that the petitioner not leave the Trial Court's jurisdiction without permission, participate regularly in the trial, and not influence witnesses.

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010099162026

undefined

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

Case No. : Bail Appln./1322/2026

HAREN DAS

SON OF ARABINDRA RAJBONGSHI VILLAGE BALIKARIA BHAKATPARA PS NALBARI DISTRICT NALBARI 781334 ASSAM

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE LD. PP, ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S CHAMARIA, MR M M ZAMAN,MR A N SARMAH

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

BEFORE

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA

ORDER

08.06.2026

Heard Mr. S. Chamaria, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr.

R.R. Kaushik, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 read with

Section 37 of NDPS Act, praying for granting regular bail to the petitioner, who

Page No.# 2/4

was arrested on 01.02.2026 in connection with NDPS Case No. 13/2026, pending before Special Judge, Nalbari, registered under Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act arising out of Nalbari P.S. Case No. 20/2026.

3. The prosecution case is that, on 01.02.2026 at 2:09 pm at Balikaria Bhakatpara road under Nalbari PS, based on a secret information, police recovered and seized 11.76 grams of heroin which were kept in a green colour soap case, one black colour scooty without number plate and one black colour polythene from the possession of the accused Haren Das. The informant lodged an ejahar on the said incident which was registered vide Nalbari PS Case No. 20/2026 under Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act.

4. A bail application on behalf of the present accused was rejected by the learned Special Judge, NDPS, Nalbari vide Order dated 17.03.2026 in Criminal Misc Case No. 27/2026, after considering inter-alia, the material against the accused available in the case diary and non-commencement of the trial as well as the nature of offence.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the quantity involved being 11.76 grams of heroin is an intermediate quantity and only slightly above the threshold small quantity i.e., 5 grams and that the petitioner is a local person with wife and children to support and moreover, his mother is suffering from serious ailments in respect of which documents have been annexed

Page No.# 3/4

alongwith the instant bail application.

6. Furthermore, at the time of rejection of the bail application of the petitioner by the learned Special Judge, NDPS, the case was at the investigation stage but now the charge sheet has been submitted and charges have also

been framed and the case is fixed for evidence. Furthermore, due to the continuous detention of the petitioner in jail since 11.02.2026 i.e., 120 days, he is unable to effectively consult his advocate in order to prepare his defence at the trial which is to commence this very month. It is submitted that the petitioner is willing to abide by any condition that may be imposed in the event of the bail being granted.

7. Per contra, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor submits that the materials indicate that the recovery was made directly from the possession of the petitioner and the plea of effective legal consultation is not tenable as the same is applicable in every case.

8. Having given my due consideration to the respective submissions as well as the materials on record, although there is incriminating materials against the accused, having regard to the period of detention of 120 days as well as the fact of eminent commencement of the trial as well as the personal circumstances of the accused, further detention of the petitioner is not considered necessary.

9. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed on furnishing of a bail

Page No.# 4/4

bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. It is further provided that the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Trial Court during the pendency of the trial without permission of the learned Trial Court. It is further provided that

the petitioner shall participate regularly in the trial and shall not try to influence the witnesses in any manner.

10. The bail application stands disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant