Tripura High Court
The State Of Tripura vs Jamal Haque on 17 March, 2025
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
BA No.03 of 2025
The State of Tripura
Represented by the Secretary
to the Government of Tripura,
Home Department, Agartala
---Appellant(s)
Versus
Jamal Haque,
Son of Mafijul Islam,
Resident of Salpukur,
P.S. Jatrapur, District: Sepahijala Tripura
----Respondent(s)
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Raju Datta, P.P.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rashmi Bhattacharjee, Adv.
Mr. Samar Das, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWAJIT PALIT
Order
17/03/2025
This application is filed under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. read
with Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for cancellation of bail granted to the
accused namely Jamal Hoque by Learned Special Judge,
Sepahijala District, Sonamura in connection with Case No. Special
(NDPS) 87 of 2023 by its order dated 30.01.2024.
Heard Learned P.P. Mr. Raju Datta appearing on behalf of
the state-respondent and also heard Ms. R. Bhattacharjee,
Learned Counsel along with Mr. Samar Das, Learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the accused-respondent.
Taking part in the hearing Learned P.P. drawn the attention
of this court that Learned Special Judge by the order dated
30.01.2024 granted bail to the accused without application of
proper mind and also beyond the law laid down by the Hon'ble
Apex Court. According to Learned P.P. in this case after
completion of investigation the I.O. laid chargesheet and
accordingly by the said order cognizance of offence punishable
under Section 20(b)(ii)(c)/25/29 of NDPS Act was taken and on
that day Learned Special P.P. raised strong objection against the
application for bail filed by the respondent-accused. But the
Learned Special Judge in considering the bail application came to
the observation that the rigors of Section-37 of NDPS Act would
not apply in this case and mechanically allowed bail to the
accused.
Learned P.P. relied upon the judgment dated 20.06.2024
delivered by a Coordinate Bench of this High Court in connection
with Bail Application No.30 of 2024, order dated 31.01.2025
delivered by this High Court in connection with B.A. No.92 of
2024. He also relied upon the observation of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Narcotics Control Bureau vs. Mohit Aggarwal dated
19.07.2022 reported in (2022)18 SCC 374 wherein in para
No.19 Hon'ble the Apex Court observed as under:
"19. In our opinion the narrow parameters of bail available
under Section 37 of the Act, have not been satisfied in the
facts of the instant case. At this stage, it is not safe to
conclude that the respondent has successfully
demonstrated that there are reasonable grounds to believe
that he is not guilty of the offence alleged against him, for
him to have been admitted to bail. The length of the period
of his custody or the fact that the charge-sheet 3 has been
filed and the trial has commenced are by themselves not
considerations that can be treated as persuasive grounds
for granting relief to the respondent under Section 37 of
the NDPS Act."
Referring the same Learned P.P. drawn the attention of the
court that mere filing of chargesheet cannot be a ground for
consideration of bail application in a case under NDPS Act where
there is allegation of possessing contraband items of commercial
quantity. He also referred the relevant portion of the order dated
20.06.2024 delivered by a Coordinate Bench of this High Court in
connection with BA No.30 of 2024 in para No.11 which runs as
follows:
"11. On careful consideration of the above enunciation of
law, I can easily hold that mere filing of charge-sheet is
not a ground at all or has no persuasive value to grant bail
to an accused of allegedly committing offence under the
penal provisions of NDPS Act. The materials available on
records do not suggest anything that there are reasonable
grounds to believe that the accused is not guilty of
committing the alleged offence under Sections
20(b)(ii)(c)/25/29 of the NDPS Act."
Learned P.P. also drawn the attention of the court that in
view of the discussion made in the aforesaid judgment there was
no scope on the part of the Learned Special Judge to consider the
accused to be released on bail.
Learned P.P. thereafter referred another order dated
31.01.2025 passed by this court in connection with Case No. B.A.
No. 92 of 2024 wherein in last three paragraphs this High Court
also cancelled the bail granted to the accused and finally urged for
allowing the prayer of the prosecution.
On the other hand, Learned Counsel Ms. R. Bhattacharjee
along with Mr. S. Das, Learned Counsel appearing for the
respondent-accused strongly objected the submission made by
Learned P.P. and submitted that in this case the accused was in
custody for a considerable long period of time and trial by this
time has commenced and prosecution up to this stage has
adduced only six numbers of witnesses and considering the
materials on record there is no scope to reject the bail granted to
the respondent-accused at this stage and furthermore, it was also
submitted that even after conclusion of trial there will be no scope
for convicting the accused as there is serious non-compliance of
the mandatory provisions of law. So after elapsing of a long period
the application filed by the State-applicant cannot be accepted and
urged for dismissal of this application.
Here in the case at hand the prosecution was set into motion
on the basis of an FIR laid by one Inspection Arup Debbarma of
Jatrapur P.S. on 26.06.2023 to O.C., Jatrapur P.S., Sepahijala
Tripura alleging inter alia that on 25.06.2023 at about 2035 hours
Sri Jitender Singh, Assistant Commandant, C-Coy of 133 Bn. BSF,
Salpukur BOP informed to O/C of Jatrapur PS over telephone that
they need to conduct raid against NDPS items at Salpukur areas
and he requested for providing local police for the same purpose.
The matter was entered in Jatrapur PS GD and the OC informed
the matter to SDPO Sonamura for seeking permission to conduct
joint raid at Salpukur area and accordingly after obtaining
permission SDPO Sonamura, SI Tapan Das along with PS staffs
and W/C Sima Das left for Salpukur area with BSF personnel on
25.06.2023 after making necessary entries in GD entry book.
Thereafter the informant along with other staff conducted raid in
the house of Jamal Hoque and on being seen the police personnel
said Jamal Hoque tried to abscond but failed. Thereafter they
conducted search and in course of search they recovered three
numbers of plastic blue colour drum containing 85 kgs dry ganja
in present of witnesses. Accordingly the seizure was made and the
accused was taken into custody and the FIR was laid to the
concerned Police Station. The accused was produced before the
Learned Court of Special Judge on 26.06.2023 and thereafter he
was released on bail by the order dated 30.01.2024 and
challenging that order of bail this application for cancellation of
bail is presented before this High Court.
I have heard detailed submission of both the parties and also
perused the order dated 30.01.2024 delivered by Learned Special
Judge. Admittedly in this case cognizance is already been taken on
the ground that the accused possessed contraband items of
commercial quantity. I have also seen the aforesaid citation of the
Hon'ble Apex Court and the order passed by the Coordinate Bench
of this High Court and also by this Court. It appears that upon
filing of chargesheet the same cannot divest any right upon the
accused person to be released on bail. Here in the case at hand
from the order dated 30.01.2024 it appears that Learned Trial
court without assigning any cogent ground came to the
observation that since the chargesheet is filed so Section 37 of the
NDPS Act would not attract and allowed the accused to go on bail
which in my considered view was totally impermissible and not
tenable in the eye of law. Because once the chargesheet is
submitted within time and there is prima facie allegation of
possession of contraband items of commercial quantity there was
very least scope on the part of the Learned Special Judge to grant
bail to the accused which Learned Special Judge has committed
serious error in deciding the matter.
In view of the above, the instant application for cancellation
of bail filed by the prosecution stands allowed. The order dated
30.01.2024 delivered by the Learned Special Judge, Sepahijala
District, Sonamura in connection with Case No.Special (NDPS) 87
of 2023 stands set aside and cancelled. The respondent-accused is
to surrender before the Learned Court of Special Judge on or
before 01.04.2025 at 11.00 a.m. failing which the Learned Special
Judge shall pass appropriate order to ensure arrest of the accused
and to commit the accused to custody. The bail bond executed by
the accused and his sureties, if any, stands set aside and
cancelled.
With this observation this application stands disposed of.
A copy of this order along with the case record be
communicated to the Learned Special Judge, Sepahijala District,
Sonamura immediately and a copy of this order be supplied to I.O.
through Learned P.P.
However, before departing my part it appears that our
officers who are dealing with NDPS cases needs to be undergo
more training programme regarding granting of bail to the
accused persons. So a copy of this order be communicated to the
Director, Judicial Academy for arranging time to time training
programme of the Special Judges on the topic of NDPS Act. So, a
copy of this order be communicated to the Director, Judicial
Academy for information and compliance.
JUDGE
MOUMITA MOUMITA DATTA
DATTA 05:04:38 +05'30'
Moumita
