HC Grants Bail in Codeine Syrup Case for Lack of Evidence

The Gauhati High Court granted regular bail to an accused booked under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act after finding that the prosecution material only showed that his GST number appeared in the e-way bills accompanying the seized consignment and did not establish any direct connection with the alleged trafficking operation. Justice Sanjeev Kumar Sharma held that there were reasonable grounds to believe that the accused may not be guilty of the offences alleged against him.

The case arose from the seizure of 30,576 bottles of Eskuf cough syrup containing Codeine Phosphate and Chlorpheniramine Maleate from a six-wheeler truck intercepted at Churaibari Watch Post in August 2025. The contraband was allegedly concealed inside palm oil containers. During the investigation, police examined transport documents and e-way bills and found that the GST registration number reflected in the documents belonged to “Maa Sushila Agency”, a business owned by the petitioner, Ranjit Saha.

Before the High Court, the petitioner argued that he had no connection with either the seized truck or the consignments found therein. He submitted that his GSTIN had been misused by the actual offenders and that he had never placed any order with the consignor entities named in the transport documents. He further pointed out that he had cooperated with the investigation by responding to notices issued under Section 67 of the NDPS Act and had personally appeared before the authorities prior to his arrest.

The Court examined the case records and noted that although the petitioner’s GST number appeared in the e-way bills, the investigation had not produced any material linking him with the consignors, the transporters, or the co-accused persons. “None of the other witnesses or co-accused persons who have been arrested have implicated the present petitioner in any manner.”

The Court further observed that no documents had been recovered to show any business transactions between the petitioner and the consignor firms. It also noted the absence of call records or any other evidence demonstrating communication or association between the petitioner and the other accused. “All that is available in the form of material against the present petitioner is the e-way bills, where the GSTIN number of the petitioner’s firm is reflected.”

Considering that the charge sheet had already been filed and keeping in view the requirements of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the Court held that there existed reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioner may not be guilty of the offence. It also found no material suggesting that he was likely to engage in similar offences if released.

Accordingly, the High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner upon furnishing a bond of Rs 1 lakh with two sureties of the like amount, subject to the condition that he would regularly attend trial proceedings and refrain from influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence.

To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below.