Md. Jiarul Hoque @ Jia v. The State of Assam

ORDER Date : 09.04.2024

Heard Mr. F. Haque, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.

Page No.# 2/3 This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying for grant of bail to the accused/petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with Dharamtul P.S. Case No. 08/2024, under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code.

It is submitted by Mr. F. Haque, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the accused/petitioner is innocent and he is not involved in the hijacking of the truck or unloading of the theft articles. He is only a businessman who deals with the business of areca nuts and he purchased some bags of areca nuts only on good faith which was seized by the police from his godown. Further he submitted that he was initially arrested in connection with Mornoi P.S. Case No. 08/2024, under Sections 380/411 of the Indian Penal Code, and subsequently released on bail after 48 days in custody and in the present case, he is in custody for last 36 days. Thus, the I.O. got ample opportunity to interrogate the present accused/petitioner keeping him in custody. In this context, Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has submitted that a very serious allegation of hijacking of truck along with the allegation of theft is brought against the present accused/petitioner. Further he submitted that there are sufficient incriminating materials available in the Case Diary against the present accused/petitioner showing his involvement in the alleged offence. The value of the stolen articles is around Rs. 37,80,000/- and the investigation is still under progress and out of 15,000 Kgs of areca nuts, only around 5,000 Kgs of areca nuts are being seized till date and thus, the huge amount of the stolen articles are yet to be recovered/seized by police. Further he submitted that from the Case Diary it reveals that 1668 Kgs. of areca nuts were seized from the possession of the present accused/petitioner and Page No.# 3/3 those areca nuts were directly unloaded in his godown after hijacking of the truck and thus, he cannot be said to be a bona fide purchaser of the areca nuts.

After hearing the submissions made by the learned counsels for both sides and also considering the entire aspects of the case as well as the materials available in the Case Diary, it is seen that the present accused/petitioner cannot be held to be a bona fide purchaser of the said areca nuts and hence, I find that further custodial interrogation may be required to unearth some other facts involved in the case and therefore, I do not find it a fit case to extend the privilege of bail to the accused/ petitioner at this stage and accordingly, the same stands rejected.

In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of.

The Case Diary be sent back. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010075922024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1106/2024 MD. JIARUL HOQUE @ JIA S/O FAIJLUR HOQUE VILL- PAKHLIGURI P.S. KRISHNAI DIST. GOALPARA, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR F HAQUE Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA