Amir Hussain v. The State of Assam

ORDER

06.10.2023

¶1Heard Mr. N.J. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam.

¶2This application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been preferred by the petitioner, namely, Amir Hussain, who has been detained behind the bars since 28.08.2023 (since last 39 days) in connection with Sapatgram Police Station Case No. 68/2023 under Sections 120B/457/302 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶3The accusation in this case is that on 27-08-2023, one Sirajul Haque lodged an FIR before the In-charge of Rani Ganj Police Outpost under Sapatgram Police Station, inter-alia, alleging that on the night of 25-08-2023, 8(eight) numbers of accused persons named in the FIR, including the present Petitioner, illegally trespassed into the house of the elder brother of the first informant, namely Shah Jalal Sheikh, and brutally killed him along with his wife, Narzima Begum, with sharp weapons, and thereafter fled away. On the next day, the family members of the brother of the first informant found the dead bodies of both the deceased persons.

¶4Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the name of the present petitioner has been included in Serial No. 6 of the FIR merely on suspicion as there was no eyewitness to the alleged incident. It is Page No.# 3/5 also submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been detained behind the bar since last 39 days without any direct evidence against him regarding his involvement and merely on the basis of suspicion and therefore, he has prayed for allowing the present petitioner to go on bail on any condition which may be imposed by this court.

¶5On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary of Sapatgram P.S. Case No. 68/23 which was called for in connection with this case and has submitted that the investigation of this case is at crucial stage and considering the nature of offence involved in this case, he vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the present petitioner. He has also submitted that two of the main accused who are suspected to have main role in the alleged offence are still absconding and on that ground he has opposed the grant of bail to the present petitioner. It is also submitted by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the release of the present petitioner on bail at this stage would affect the fair investigation and therefore, it is submitted by the bail may not be granted to the present petitioner.

¶6I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for both the sides and have perused the materials on record including the case diary of Sapatgram P.S. Case No. 68/23.

¶7It appears on perusal of the case record that, at this stage of the investigation, there is no direct evidence of offence alleged in the FIR. Though, the offence involved in this case is very heinous and is a case of gruesome double murder of husband and wife in their own house. However, at this stage of investigation, when the present petitioner Page No.# 4/5 has already undergone detention behind the bars since last 39 days, apart from mere suspicion there is no such material against him in the case diary to justify his further custodial detention for the sake of investigation. The petitioner may not be detained any further merely on the basis of only suspicion, how so ever strong it may be.

¶8For the above-mentioned reasons, this Court is of considered opinion that the further custodial detention of the above-named petitioner may not be necessary for fair completion of the investigation of this case if the present petitioner cooperates with the Investigating Officer in the investigation.

¶9In view of above, the above named petitioner is hereby directed to be released on bail of Rs 30,000/- with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of learned SDJM(S), Bilasipara subject to following condition:- i. The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation as and when so required by the Investigating Officer during the pendency of the investigation of Sapatgram P.S. Case No. 68/2023. ii. The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person or persons who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts to the Investigating Officer. iii. The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of Dhubri District without prior leave of Page No.# 5/5 SDJM(M), Bilasipara and intimation to the Investigating Officer of Sapatgram P.S. Case No. 68/23 during pendency of the investigation. With above observation, this bail application is hereby disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/5 GAHC010216762023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:o oBailoAppln./3441/2023 AMIRoHUSSAIN SONoOFoKHAYRAToALI oR/O-oVILLAGE-oBELTARI oP.O.oRANIGANJ oP.S.oSAPATGRAM oDISTRICT-oDHUBRI oASSAM oVERSUS THEoSTATEoOFoASSAM REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoPUBLICoPROSECUTOR o------------ oAdvocateoforo:oMR.oRASHIDULoISLAM Advocateoforo:oPP oASSAMoappearingoforoTHEoSTATEoOFoASSAM ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA