Abdul Hamid v. The State of Assam and Anr

O R D E R

20.11.2023.

Heard Mr. A.M. Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Page No.# 2/3

¶2This is an application under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C., read with Section 401/397 of the Cr.P.C., filed by petitioner Abdul Hamid, with prayer for modification of the order dated 21.08.2023, passed by the learned SDJM (S) No.2, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati, passed in connection with the Basistha P.S. Case No.166/2023, registered under Sections 379/429/34 of the IPC, read with Section 13(1)/16 of the Assam Cattle Preservation (Amendment) Act, 2021, read with Section 11(1)(d) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, and quashing and setting aside the order dated 13.10.2023, passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.1, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati, in Criminal Revision No.59/2023.

¶3Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing for the respondents.

¶4The learned Addl. P.P. has accepted notice on behalf of both the respondents and no formal notice is required to be issued. However, sufficient copies to be furnished to the learned counsel for the respondents, during the course of the day.

¶5Vide order dated 21.08.2023, the learned SDJM (S) No.2, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati passed an order for zimma of the vehicle bearing Regn. No.NL-02Q-7984 to the registered owner, on furnishing a bank guarantee equal to the value of the vehicle. The vehicle is valued at Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees fifteen lacs) only and the petitioner is unable to submit the bank guarantee for such a huge amount. So the petitioner preferred a revision being Criminal Revision No.59/2023, before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.1, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati and vide judgment and order dated 13.10.2023, the petitioner's prayer for modification of the order dated 21.08.2023, passed by the learned SDJM (S) No.2, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati, in connection with the Basistha P.S. Case No.166/2023, in so far as the bank guarantee is concerned was dismissed. Page No.# 3/3

¶6I have considered the submissions at the bar and have perused the record.

¶7It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner will abide by the other conditions imposed upon him vide order dated 21.08.2023, in connection with the Basistha P.S. Case No.166/2023 but he is unable to furnish the bank guarantee equal to the valuation of the vehicle tantamounting to Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees fifteen lacs).

¶8In view of the above, I have taken a pragmatic approach that although no illegality or impropriety is discernable in the order(s) impugned, but for the end of justice, the order(s) is modified.

¶9As the petitioner is unable to furnish the bank guarantee of the vehicle amounting to Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees fifteen lacs), so the petitioner is directed to furnish suitable solvent surety of Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees fifteen lacs), instead of bank guarantee for zimma of the aforementioned vehicle.

¶10In terms of the above observation, petition is disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010258972023 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./1222/2023 ABDUL HAMID S/O AMJAD ALI VILL- DHOLAGASSA P.S. MERERCHAR DIST. BONGAIGAON, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:SRI KAPIL PATHAK I/C JORABAT OUT POST UNDER BASISTHA POLICE STATION DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSAM-78102 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A M KHAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND