The Gauchati HC rejected bail application under BS(23) s.483 for an NCB arrestee. The judge found Section 37 NDPS Act applied due to commercial quantity recovery and CDR evidence, dismissing the plea of innocent driving.
Prayer for bail stands rejected; petition stands dismissed.
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.# 1/2
GAHC010159422026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./2154/2026
AIN UDDIN LASKAR
SON OF LATE NOJIR AHMED, R/O - DHONIPUR, P.S - SONAI, DIST - CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN- 788119
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE STANDING COUNSEL, NCB
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M DUTTA, L DEKA,MR. N BARDOLOI,POOJA ROY
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, NCB,
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA
ORDER
Date : 15.09.2026
Heard Mr. M. Dutta, learned senior counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.K.D. Chdoudhury, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the N.C.B.
Page No.# 2/2
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the bar of Section 37 of the NDPS Act attracts and prevents the grant of bail given the commercial quantity of heroin recovered and prior communication revealed by CDR analysis.
Whether the presiding judge finds sufficient reason to impute guilty conductivity despite the applicant's claim of being an innocent driver.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
AIN UDDIN LASKAR
THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE STANDING COUNSEL, NCB
SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
