Ramez Uddin v. The State of Assam

ORDER

09.05.2024

Heard Mr. R. Ali, learned counsel for the accused and Mr. B.B. Gogoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.

¶2This application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is preferred by accused namely, Ramez Uddin, who has been languishing in Page No.# 2/3 jail hazot since 26.02.2024, in connection with the Jalukbari P.S. Case No. 127/2024, under Sections 454/380 of the IPC, for granting bail.

¶3It is to be noted here that the above mentioned case has been registered on the basis of one FIR lodged by one Pinku Paul, on 25.02.2024. The essence of allegations made in the said FIR is that on 24.02.2024, at about 16:30 hrs., she went to market and when she returned to home, she found her godrej broken and found the clothes scattered everywhere in the floor and also found the TV lying on the floor and the door of the house broken.

¶4Mr. Ali, learned counsel for the accused submits that the accused was arrested on 26.02.2024, and since then he has been languishing in jail hazot for last 14 days. Mr. Ali further submits that the accused person was arrested only on the ground of suspicion and that he is innocent and no way involved with the offence alleged in the FIR. Mr. Ali also submits that the accused is ready to cooperate with the investigating agency and therefore, it is contended to allow the petition.

¶5On the other hand, Mr. Gogoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary before this Court and submits that the materials so far collected in the case diary are inadequate to show the complicity of the accused with the offence alleged in the FIR.

¶6Having heard the submissions of learned Advocates of both sides, I have carefully gone through the petition as well as the documents placed on record and also perused the Case Diary with the assistance of learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

¶7It appears that the accused was arrested on 26.02.2024, and since then he has been languishing in jail hazot for last 14 days. Further, it appears that Page No.# 3/3 the accused person was arrested only on the ground of suspicion and there are no materials in the case diary to show the complicity of the accused with the offence alleged in the FIR.

¶8Having considered above and also considering the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, this Court is of the view that further custodial detention of the accused is not warranted, in the interest of investigation.

¶9Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 50,000/- only, with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup [M] at Guwahati, the accused person be enlarged on bail.

¶10In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of.

¶11The case diary be returned.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010088022024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1264/2024 RAMEZ UDDIN S/O JAMIR ALI RESIDENT OF SATRAKHANARA, PO SATRAKHANARA, PS BAGHBAR, DIST BARPETA, ASSAM 781308 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R ALI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN