Salem Uddin @ Selim Uddin and Anr v. The State of Assam

ORDER Date : 11-01-2024

¶1Heard Mr. M.A. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioners Salem Page No.# 2/3 Uddin @ Selim Uddin and Moinul Haque.

¶2The petitioners Salem Uddin @ Selim Uddin and Moinul Haque have filed this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and they are behind bars since 11.06.2023 in connection with Sessions Case No. 141 of 2023 arising out of Nilambazar Police Station Case No. 113/2023 registered under Sections 398/399 of IPC read with Sections 21(1A)/35 of Arms Act pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karimganj.

¶3Heard Mr. B.B. Gogoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State of Assam.

¶4It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they were arrested speculating that they were preparing to commit dacoity. Charge sheets have also been erroneously laid against the petitioners. The allegations against the petitioners are that while the petitioners were intercepted by the police party. They were apprehended, carrying one handmade pistol, three handmade sub rifle, boll bearing use as buckshot, four nos. 22 (twenty two) rounds, one 12 (twelve) bore cartage, some gun powder and one door breaking lever. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that as these articles were recovered from the car in which the petitioners were travelling, it was erroneously speculated that the petitioners were making preparation for dacoity whereas this is not so.

¶5The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised serious objection stating that the petitioners were carrying a huge cache of arms which clearly reveals the petitioners' intention.

¶6I have considered the submissions at the bar with circumspection.

¶7The petitioners have been behind bars since 11.06.2023. Trial has not yet commenced. The petitioners are local residents and they have pledged to Page No.# 3/3 cooperate with the trial. It is also submitted that further detention may result in punitive detention.

¶8Considering all aspects and in view of my foregoing discussions, petition is allowed.

¶9The petitioners Salem Uddin @ Selim Uddin and Moinul Haque are enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac) each with a local surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. The learned trial Court may impose conditions to secure attendance of the petitioners during trial. Bail Application stands disposed of in the above terms.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010278842023 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./4278/2023 SALEM UDDIN @ SELIM UDDIN AND ANR S/O LATE JAHIR UDDIN R/O VILL- CUTOK P.S. NILAMBAZAR DIST. KARIMGANJ ASSAM 2: MOINUL HAQUE S/O LATE ASHMAID ALI R/O VILL- BAZARGHAT P.S. RATABARI DIST. KARIMGANJ VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM TO BE REP. BY THE PP ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR. M A CHOUDHURY Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND