Mojibur Rahman and Anr v. The State of Assam

ORDER

28.08.2023

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, Mojibur Rahman and Abdul Barek, who have been languishing in jail hazot in connection with the Sonapur P.S. Case No. 142/2023, under Sections 379/411/34 of the IPC read with Sections 13[1]/16 of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act and read with Section 11[a] [b][d] of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act, for granting bail.

¶3The aforementioned case has been registered on the basis of one FIR lodged by one UBC namely, Ananta Bordoloi, on 22.07.2023. The essence of allegations made in the FIR is that the accused persons have been found carrying 39 nos. of cattle in a Truck bearing registration No. AS-01-NC-8658, without any valid documents.

¶4Mr. Chutia, learned counsel for the accused persons submits that the accused persons were arrested on 22.07.2023, and since then they have been languishing in jail hazoot for last 38 days. Mr. Chutia further submits that they are driver and handyman of the said Truck and they are not involved with the offence alleged in the FIR and one Sariful Islam is the owner of the cattle, which were being carried by their vehicle and that they are ready to cooperate with the investigating agency and therefore, it is contended to allow the petition.

¶5On the other hand, Mr. Barua, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary before this Court and opposed the petition by contending that the IO has collected sufficient materials in support of the allegations made in the FIR.

¶6Having heard the submission of learned Advocates for both sides, I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and Page No.# 3/3 the case diary with the assistance of Mr. Barua, learned Addl. P.P.

¶7It is not in dispute that the accused persons were arrested on

22.07.2023, and since then they have been languishing in jail hazoot for last 38 days and that the IO has achieved substantial progress in the investigation of the case.

¶8Considering the period of detention as well as the nature of accusation and the punishment prescribed for the same and also considering the submissions of learned Advocates for both sides, this Court is of considered opinion that further custodial detention of the accused seems to be not required in the interest of investigation.

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

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

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010178672023 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2921/2023 MOJIBUR RAHMAN AND ANR S/O LT. HABIBUR RAHMAN R/O VILL-MUAMARI P.S. SAMAGURI DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM 2: ABDUL BAREK S/O MD. MUNNAF ALI R/O VILL- KUTHORI P.S. JAKHALABANDHA DIST. NAGAON ASSAM 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