Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/3 vs The State Of Assam on 28 March, 2025
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010049172025
2025:GAU-AS:3694
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./686/2025
SALIM KHAN
S/O ABDUL HELIM, R/O HAOREBI TUREL DAM MAKHA, LILONG, P.S.
LILONG, DISTRICT THOUBAL, MANIPUR
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. Y S MANNAN, MR. J ALI
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
ORDER
28.03.2025
1. Heard learned counsel Mr. Y.S. Mannan for the petitioner Salim Khan.
2. The petitioner has filed this application under Section 483 of the BNSS,
2023 with prayer for bail as he is behind bars since 15.02.2022 in connection
with NDPS Case No. 119/2022 under Sections 21(C)/29 of the NDPS Act arising
Page No.# 2/3
out of Basistha P.S. Case No. 209/2022 under Section 21(C)/24/29 of the NDPS
Act.
3. Heard Mr. D. P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for
the respondent State.
4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has been
behind bars for more than 3 years 1 month 12 days. All the co-accused have
been granted bail. 3 out of 5 enlisted witnesses have been examined so far. The
last witness was examined on 25.05.2023. The petitioner’s right to personal
liberty has thus been curtailed. Trial has been procrastinated by the State as
well as by the Court.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised objection stating that in
offences of serious nature, ground of parity cannot be considered and the
length of detention is also not to be considered. The petitioner was charged for
carrying 0.500 kgs of suspected heroin and bail may be rejected.
6. I have considered the submissions at the Bar with circumspection.
7. I have considered the petitioner’s prayer on the ground of parity. All the co-
accused have been enlarged on bail. I have also considered the submission that
the last witness examined was on 25.05.2023. The petitioner was behind bars
since the day he was arrested i.e. on 15.02.2022.
8. I have considered the submission that the petitioner’s right to personal
liberty has been curtailed due to the procrastination of the trial.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the decision of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Ravi Prakash Vs. The State of Orissa reported in (2023)
SCC Online SC 1109, wherein it has been observed that:-
“The prolonged incarceration
Page No.# 3/3generally militates against the most precious
fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the
Constitution, and in such a situation, the conditional liberty
must override the statutory embargo written under Section
37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act.”
10. In view of my foregoing discussions, the petitioner is enlarged on bail of Rs.
1 lac with two suitable sureties to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court
under the conditions that:-
(i) The petitioner shall co-operate with the trial,
and
(ii) The petitioner shall refrain from such
activities with which he is alleged.
11. On breach of any of the bail conditions, the learned Trial Court may also
impose additional conditions to secure the attendance of the petitioner.
12. In terms of the above observation, this bail application stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant