Page No.# 1/3 vs The State Of Assam
2022 Latest Caselaw 1959 Gua

                                                                      Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010092122022




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

                               Case No. : Bail Appln./1085/2022

            ABDUL KARIM AND 2 ORS
            S/O LATE ABDUL ALI, R/O VILL-KALIBARI, P.S. AND DIST-DIBRUGARH,
            ASSAM

            2: ARJU ALI
             S/O LATE TARJU ALI
            VILL-KALIBARI
             P.S. AND DIST-DIBRUGARH
            ASSAM

            3: ROHENA BEGUM
            W/O TARJU ALI
            VILL-KALIBARI
             P.S. AND DIST-DIBRUGARH
            ASSA

            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM
            REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM



Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. B CHETRI

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
                                                                             Page No.# 2/3


                                   BEFORE
                  HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

                                        ORDER

03.06.2022 Heard Shri B Chetri, learned counsel for the applicants, namely, 1. Abdul Karim;

2. Arju Ali and 3. Rohena Begum, who have filed this bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.PC praying for bail in connection with NDPS Case No. 41/2021 arising out of Dibrugarh PS Case No. 1084/2021 under Sections 22(c)/29(i) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS), pending in the Court of the learned Special Judge, Dibrugarh.

The applicants were arrested on 03.06.2021.

Shri Chetri, learned counsel for the applicants has fairly submitted that on an earlier occasion i.e., 30.03.2022, the bail application of the applicants, being BA/452/2022 was rejected. By drawing the attention of this Court to the report of the Forensic Science dated 02.07.2021, the learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the results of the test were negative for NDPS substance. He, therefore submits that the applicants be released on bail.

Shri RJ Baruah, learned Addl. PP, Assam, on the other hand, submits that the aforesaid interpretation/version of the applicants is not correct. The learned Addl. PP further submits that the said report dated 02.07.2021 of the Directorate of the Forensic Science cannot be read in isolation with the materials on record which include the statement of a co-accused. Shri Baruah, accordingly submits that there were two exhibits which were collected from the place of recovery. While the first exhibit gave negative test for drugs and NDPS, the second exhibit came positive. The learned Addl. PP, accordingly submits that since one sample has turned out to be positive in the forensic science test, the question of giving the benefit of doubt to the applicants, at this stage, will not arise.

Page No.# 3/3

At this stage, Shri Chetri, learned counsel has referred to a judgment in the case of Hussain & Anr. Vs. Union of Indiai, reported in (2017) 5 SCC 702 in which it has been stated that unnecessary delay in trial may be a reason, either to expedite the investigation or to grant bail.

In the instant case, it is seen that out of 5 PWs, 4 have already been examined and therefore, it cannot be said there has been undue delay in the trial.

In that view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that no case for grant of bail is made out and accordingly, the same is rejected.

At this stage, Shri Chetri, learned counsel for the applicants prays for a direction for expeditious trial.

It is needless to say that the trial in question or for that matters, all trials should be conducted as expeditiously as possible.

The bail application stands dismissed.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant