Eyasin Ali and 2 Ors v. The State of Assam

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010057252024 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oAB/745/2024o EYASINoALIoANDo2oORS.o S/OoANTAJoALI,oP/R/OoVILL-oBOLDIARoALGAoCHARoN.C.,oP.O.- MUTHAKHOWA,oP.S.-SOUTHoSALMARA,oDIST-oDHUBRI,oASSAM 2:oSONAoULLAH oS/OoFULCHANoALI oP/R/OoVILL-oBOLDIARoALGAoCHARoN.C. oP.O.-MUTHAKHOWA oP.S.-SOUTHoSALMARA oDIST-oDHUBRI oASSAM 3:oARFANoALI oS/OoFULCHANoALI oP/R/OoVILL-oBOLDIARoALGAoCHARoN.C. oP.O.-MUTHAKHOWA oP.S.-SOUTHoSALMARA oDIST-oDHUBRI oASSAo VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMo REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoPUBLICoPROSECUTOR,oASSAM AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oMR.oBoCoDASo AdvocateoforotheoRespondento:oPP,oASSAMoo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Page No.# 2/3 B E F O R E HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI

20.03.2024

Heard Mr. B.C. Das, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. S.H. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. A. Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State respondent as well as Mr. R. Islam, learned counsel for the informant.

¶2This is an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for granting pre-arrest bail to the accused petitioners, namely, i.e. Eyasin Ali, Sona Ullah and Arfan Ali, who are appending arrest, in connection with South Salmara P.S. Case No. 25/2024, registered under Section 147/148/149/436/326/325/307/302/385/427 of the IPC.

¶3The case of the prosecution is that an FIR was lodged on 06.02.2024, alleging inter-alia that on 06.02.2024, the accused persons conjointly armed with lathi, dao etc. entered into the house of one Badshah Ali and set fire in his house.

¶4It is further alleged that the accused persons chased the brother of the informant who was working in the field stabbed him on his head, for which he ultimately died.

¶5Mr. B.C. Das, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been wrongly implicated in the alleged offence and that they have no role to play.

¶6Ms. A. Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State respondent fairly submits that on the basis of materials available in the case Page No.# 3/3 diary that the Investigating Officer has not collected any adverse materials at this stage against the petitioners.

¶7Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is of the considered view that custodial interrogation of the petitioners may not be justified for the ongoing investigation. Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the petitioners named above, shall be released on pre-arrest bail in connection with the above noted case on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 50,000/-each with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject of course to conditions:-

(i) the petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 7 days failing which failing which from the 8th day, the pre-arrest bail shall have no force;

(ii) the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to the informant or to any other persons who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from deposing against the petitioners

in

the

pending

trial

against

them;

and

(iii) the petitioners shall refrain from committing any offence similar to that with which they have been accused of in the instant case. With the above observation, this anticipatory bail application is hereby disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant