Mohi Uddin v. The State of Assam

ORDER

26.09.2023

Heard Ms. G. Borah, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. K.K. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.

¶2Apprehending arrest in connection with Sonapur P.S. Case No. 174/2023, under Sections 379/411 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, this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is preferred by applicant namely, Mohi Uddin for grant of pre-arrest bail.

¶3The said case has been registered on the basis of one F.I.R., lodged by Page No.# 2/3 Hemanta Kalita, on 22.08.2023. The essence of allegations made in the FIR is that acting on a tip off they have intercepted one TATA Truck bearing registration No. AS-01-PC-8367, which was coming from Nagaon towards Jurabat and during search they have found 40 numbers of cattle being carried illegally by the driver and handyman of the aforesaid Truck.

¶4Ms. Borah, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the registered owner of the Truck and that the applicant is innocent and no way involved with the offence alleged in the FIR and that he is ready to cooperate with the investigating agency, and therefore, it is contended to allow the petition.

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

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

¶7It is not in dispute that the applicant is the registered owner of the seized vehicle. However, the materials collected so far in the case diary are inadequate to show the complicity of the applicant with the offence alleged in the FIR.

¶8Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the applicant, in connection with Sonapur P.S. Case No. 174/2023, under Sections 379/411 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, he shall be enlarged on pre-arrest bail on his executing a bond of Rs. 50,000/- only, with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority.

¶9The above privilege is, however, subject to the following conditions: Page No.# 3/3

(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required;

(ii) that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and

(iii) that the applicant shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned CJM, Kamrup [M] at Guwahati, without prior permission.

¶10In terms of above, this AB stands disposed of.

¶11The case diary be returned.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010204072023 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/3138/2023 MOHI UDDIN S/O- ABDUL KARIM, R/O- AMONI, NAM GUMUTHA, P.O. AMONI, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE P.P., ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. G BORAH Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN