Communication of arrest grounds is constitutionally sufficient if explained effectively to the arrestee in a vernacular language, regardless of the written format. Prohibitive statutory bars on bail apply strictly to offenses involving the possession of commercial quantities of narcotics, provided procedural safeguards are substantively met.

JUDGMENT & ORDER (CAV) :

1. Heard Mr. M. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Addl. PP for the State of Assam.

2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, praying for bail to the petitioner, who was arrested on 12.06.2025, in connection with the Ratabri P.S Case No. 99/2025 registered under Section 22(c)/25/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

3. The brief facts of the case is that on 12.06.2025 the informant namely, Danswrang Basumatary, Sub-Inspector of Police of Ratabari Police Station, has lodged a written F.I.R. before the Officer-In-Charge of the Ratabari Police Station, alleging inter alia that on the basis of the telephonic information received from the Additional Superintendent of Police (HQ), Sribhumi, about the transportation of large quantity of suspected narcotic substances by one vehicle bearing Registration No. AS-11EC-5747, the informant had conducted a Naka checking in front of Vetarbond AD Camp.

Accordingly, at around 2.30 Α.Μ. the vehicle was intercepted and after conducting search, suspected narcotic substances was recovered there from. On receipt the said F.I.R. dated 12.06.2025, the police of Ratabari Police Station has registered the same as Ratabari Police Station Case No. 99/2025 under sections 22(c)/25/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

4. After registering the case vide Ratabari Police Station Case No. 99/2025, the police of Ratabari Police Station has investigated the case and arrested amongst others, the petitioner in connection with the instant case. Thereafter, on 12.06.2025, the petitioner was forwarded before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sribhumi, Assam. The petitioner was given in one day police custody and on completion of the police custody, the petitioner was forwarded again to the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sribhumi, Assam, from where he was sent to judicial custody and since then the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody.

5. The Charge-sheet has already been submitted on 27.11.25by the IO under section 22(c)/25/29 of the NDPS Act, and accordingly, NDPS special case No. 63/25 was registered, and the matter is at the stage of charge hearing.

6. Apart from claiming innocence, the learned counsel has assailed the arrest of the present petitioner on the ground of violation of Section 47 and 48 BNSS, contrary to the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Vihaan Kumar Vs. State of Haryana reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 269 and Mihir Rajesh Shah Vs. State of Maharastra reported in 2025 INSC 1288.

7. The learned counsel has drawn the attention of the court to the notice under section 47 issued to the present petitioner, which is in the English language. It is contended that the petitioner does not understand the English language and has only learned to sign his name in the English language and that he is a school dropout who had studied up to fourth standard in Bengali medium.

8. Firstly, there cannot be any universal proposition that a person who has studied up to the fourth standard in a vernacular medium school in Assam cannot understand the English language, inasmuch as English is very much a part of the curriculum in vernacular medium schools all over Assam, a fact of which judicial notice can be taken.

9. Moreover, although, the petitioner has signed the notice in the Bengali language, the contents thereof have been e