Advocates:
['Mr P SAHA', '', 'Mr S CHAKRABORTY', 'R SINHA', 'PP']

Page 1 of 17

HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA

AGARTALA

B.A No.68 of 2021

Sri. Nilmadhab Nath on behalf of accused person

SRI NIPAN NATH @ LITON, S/O Lt. Gakul Chandra

Nath of Village and P.O-Bhagaban Nagar, Ward No. 7,

PS-Kailashahar, District- Unakoti.

…………… Petitioner(s).

Vs.

THE STATE OF TRIPURA,

Represented by Ld. PP, High Court of Tripura,

Agartala.

…………… Respondent(s).

For Petitioner(s) :

Mr. S. Chakraborty, Advocate.

Mr. P. Saha, Advocate.

For Respondent(s):

Mr. Ratan Datta, Public Prosecutor.

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. G. CHATTOPADHYAY

O R D E R

24/09/2021

This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C hereunder) for granting bail to

accused Nipan Nath @ Liton who is in custody for about 80 days in

connection with Irani Police Station Case No.2021/IRN/039 dated

02.07.2021 under sections 21(c), 22(c), 25, 27, 27A and 29 of the

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (the NDPs

Act hereunder). Accused has applied for bail on various grounds.

[2]

Heard Mr. Saradindu Chakraborty, learned Advocate

appearing for the accused. Heard Mr. Ratan Datta, learned Public

Prosecutor representing the State respondent.

Page 2 of 17

[3]

The factual background of the case is as under:

A suo motu complaint was lodged by Sri Kamala Kanta

Jamatia, Sub-Inspector of Police of Irani Police Station, Kailashahar

on 02.07.2021 with the Officer-in-charge of Irani police station. In

his suo motu FIR, the informant alleged that on 1.7.2021 at about

17.55 hours he received a secret information to the effect that

contraband were stored in the house of Md. Abdul Shaheed at

Arabindanagar within the jurisdiction of his police station and said

Abdul Shaheed also engaged people for sale of such contraband

among the consumers. The informant recorded the information in

the General Diary of the police station and passed over the said

information to the jurisdictional SDPO and Superintendent of Police.

At about 18.30 hours he along with his accompanying officers and

staff including SDPO, Kailashahar conducted raid in the house of Md.

Abdul Shaheed at Arabindanagar and spotted six persons including

present accused Nipan Nath in the house of said Md. Abdul Shaheed.

The police team detained those persons and in their presence

recovered the following contraband from the bed room of Md. Abdul

Shaheed and personal possession of the detainees:

840 Yaba tablets containing Methamphetamine

weighing 83.80 gm and 2640 SAMPFX+ tablets

containing Tramadol, several unregistered mobile

sets, cash, motor bikes etc.

From the personal possession of the present petitioner

200 Yaba Tablets and 30 strips of SAMPFX+ tablets each strip

containing 24 tablets were recovered. After search and recovery the

Page 3 of 17

accused persons including the present accused were brought to the

police station for interrogation. From their interrogation police came

to know that they were engaged by accused Abdul Shaheed for

supply of such contraband among the consumers. Six accused

including Md. Abdul Shaheed and the present petitioner were

arrested by police and the investigation of the case was taken up.

[4]

Mr. S. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the

accused has argued that alleged recovery and seizure of contraband

from the possession of the accused is completely illegal due to non

compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act. Counsel submits that

Section 50 embodies a reasonable, fair and just procedure that must

be followed during search and seizure under the NDPS Act otherwise

the evidence of search and seizure of contraband from the

possession of the accused cannot be used against him. In support of

his contention Mr. Chakraborty, learned counsel of the accused

petitioner has relied on the decision of the Apex Court in the Case of

State of Punjab Vrs. Baldeb Singh: reported