Please Log in / Register to access the full text of this judgment and the entire database
(2024) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 19025
(Arising out of SLP(Crl.)No.16434 of 2023)
Decided on: 01.03.2024
For Petitioner(s):
Mr. Ronak Karanpuria, AOR, Mr. Rohit Gautam, Adv., Mr. R. C. Gautam, Adv., Mr. Bhupendra Singh, Adv., Mr. Parteek Kumar, Adv., Mr. Akarsh Jain, Adv.
For Respondent(s):
Mr. Debojit Borkakati, AOR
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 22 (c), 29 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- NDPS case – Regular bail – High Court rejected the bail – Appellant in custody for approximately 1 year 9 months -- Charge-sheet filed on 18.7.2022, additional charge-sheet has to be filed and 20 witnesses are to be examined in the trial -- In the earlier case the petitioner acquitted, as he is a trader dealing in medical products – Bail allowed.
(Para 3-7)
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 18.10.2023 passed by the Gauhati High Court (High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh) in BAIL APPLN No. 2750 of 2023.
3. The appellant Amal Das has been facing trial in connection with NDPS Case No. 166/2022, registered pursuant to First Information Report No. 1023/2021 dated 10.06.2021 lodged with Police Station Basistha, Kamrup, in respect of offences punishable under Sections 22 (c) /29 NDPS Act, 1985. An application seeking regular bail having been rejected by the High Court vide impugned order dated 18.10.2023, the appellant has preferred the instant appeal.
4. This Court vide its order dated 02.01.2024, issued the notice in the instant matter.
5. Heard learned counsel for the appellant in support of the petition and learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record. The appellant is in custody for approximately 1 year 9 months. Charge-sheet was filed on 18.7.2022. It is also stated that additional charge-sheet has to be filed and that there are 20 witnesses to be examined in the trial. In response to the submission of learned counsel for the respondent appearing for the State, petitioner’s counsel submitted that in the earlier case the petitioner has been acquitted, that he is a trader dealing in medical products.
6. Considering the facts on record, in our view, the case for bail is made out.
7. We, therefore, allow this appeal and direct as under:
"The appellant Amal Das shall be produced before the concerned trial Court as early as possible and the trial Court shall release him on bail, subject to such conditions as it may deem appropriate to impose to ensure his presence in the proceedings arising out of NDPS Case No. 166/2022 mentioned above."
8. It is directed that the appellant shall extend complete cooperation in the trial of the instant case. The appellant shall not misuse his liberty in any manner.
9. Any infraction of the conditions shall entail cancellation of bail granted to the appellant.
10. With these observations, the appeal is allowed.
Appeal allowed.
********