- Court
- High Court of Gauhati
- Decided
- 9 June 2024
- Bench
- S. Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund
- Case no.
- Bail Appln. 1661/2024
Judgment
ORDER
10.06.2024
¶1Heard learned counsel, A. K. Azad for the petitioners, (i) Shadab Malik and (ii) Salman @ Salman Malik.
¶2This application has been filed by the petitioners under Section 439 of the Cr.PC with prayer for bail as they are behind bars for 73 days since
30.03.2024 in connection with Mushalpur P.S. Case No. 33/2024 under Sections 457/379/511/401/413/34 of the IPC.
¶3Heard Mr. B. B. Gogoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the respondent State.
¶4The petitioners are arrested in connection with allegation of attempt to remove Remote Radio Unit (RRU) from the Airtel Tower at Village No. 2, Pakhamara.
¶5Earlier the petitioners had prayed for bail and as charge-sheet was laid against them vide order dated 30.04.2024 in connection with Bail Application No. 1148/2024, this Court directed the petitioners to appear before the Jurisdictional Court.
¶6In connection with GR Case No. 156/2024 vide order dated
02.05.2024, the learned Additional CJM rejected the Bail Application of the petitioners.
¶7It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they are willing to abide by any stringent conditions, if imposed upon them. Page No.# 3/3
¶8I have considered the submissions that the petitioners are behind bars for 73 days.
¶9Investigation may have presumably progressed to a considerable extent.
¶10I have considered the submissions that the petitioners are local residents and they are not flight risks.
¶11In view of my foregoing discussions, petition is allowed.
¶12The petitioners are enlarged on bail of Rs. 30,000/-(Rs. Thirty thousand) each with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court under the conditions that;
(i) the petitioners shall refrain from any such activities with which they are alleged, and
(ii) the petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission till completion of investigation. On breach of any of the bail conditions, bail order shall stand cancelled. JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Case details
Parties and counsel
Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010114862024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1661/2024 SHADAB MALIK AND ANR. S/O ISLAMUDDIN R/O HOUSE NO. 206 GALI NO. 35, NEW ISLAM NAGAR, P.S. LISARI DIST. MEERUT, UP-250002 PRESENT ADDRESS ULUBARI, GUWAHATI, P.S. PANBAZAR DIST.KAMRUP (M), ASSAM 2: SALMAN @ SALMAN MALIK S/O YASIN R/O GARH ROAD SISOLI P.S. MUNDALI DIST. MEERUT UP-250004 PRESENT ADDRESS- ULUBARI GUWAHATI P.S. PANBAZAR DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A K AZAD Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
Source: High Court of Gauhati, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.