Sakib Ikbal and Anr v. The State of Assam

ORDER

25.08.2023

Heard Mr. T. Chutia, learned counsel for the accused and Mr. R.J. Page No.# 2/3 Barua, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.

¶2This application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is preferred by accused/applicant, namely, Sakib Ikbal and Md. Ersad Khan, who have been languishing in jail hazot in connection with the Sonapur P.S. Case No. 139/2023, under Sections 379/411/34 of the IPC read with Section 11[a][b][d] of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act and read with Section 13[1] of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act, for granting bail.

¶3The aforementioned case has been registered on the basis of one FIR lodged by one UBC-300, Karuna Kakati, on 14.07.2023. The essence of allegation made in the FIR is that the accused persons were caught red handed while they were carrying 30 nos. of cattle in a Truck, bearing registration No. UP-21-CN-2107, without any valid documents.

¶4Mr. Chutia, learned counsel for the accused submits that the accused persons were arrested on 15.07.2023, and since then they have been languishing in jail hazoot for last 42 days and that they are driver and handyman of the Truck. Mr. Chutia further submits that the owner of the cattle has already been granted the privilege of pre-arrest bail by this Court, vide order dated 22.08.2023, in AB No. 2883/2023, and that they are ready to cooperate with the investigating agency and therefore, it is contended to enlarge the present accused on bail.

¶5On the other hand, Mr. Barua, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, prays for some more time to produce the case diary before this Court.

¶6Having heard the submission of learned Advocates for both sides, I have carefully gone through the petition and the materials placed on record and Page No.# 3/3 it appears that the accused was arrested on 15.07.2023, and since then they have been languishing in the jail hajoot for last 42 days.

¶7Considering the period of detention and the nature of accusation and the punishment prescribed for the same and also considering the submission of learned Advocates for both sides, this Court is of considered opinion that further custodial detention of the accused are not required in the interest of investigation.

¶8Accordingly, 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 Guwahti, the accused persons be enlarged on bail.

¶9In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010176772023 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2920/2023 SAKIB IKBAL AND ANR S/O LT. SAMSAD AHMED R/O VILL- RAMPUR BARIYA GAON P.S. KESORIA DIST. EAST CHAMPARON, BIHAR. 2: MD. ERSAD KHAN S/O LT. SAPER KHAN R/O VILL-RAMPUR BARIYA GAON P.S. KESORIA DIST. EAST CHAMPARON BIHAR VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. T CHUTIA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN