Allowed

Akbor Ali @ Atabur Rahman v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC26 Nov 2019Bail Appln./3437/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by accused facing charge of possessing small quantity of heroin under NDPS Act. Court allowed bail considering quantum of drugs and length of detention.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail of Rs. 20,000/- with one suitable surety of like amount on conditions of not leaving jurisdiction, not hampering investigation, and not influencing witnesses.

Akbor Ali @ Atabur Rahman Vs the State of Assam — Narcotics (NDPS) | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No. 1/2

¶2

GAHC010268062019

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

¶4

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : Bail Appln. 3437/2019

¶6

1:AKBOR ALI @ ATABUR RAHMAN

¶7

S/O LATE YAKUB ALI, R/O VILL-SILPUKHURI, P.O.-SILPUKHURI, P.S.MIKIRBHETA, DIST-MORIGAON, ASSAM

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM

¶10

REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR J C BORAH

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶13

BEFORE

¶14

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Date : 26-11-2019

¶17

Heard Mr. J.C. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. N. J. Dutta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶18

This is an application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., praying for bail of the petitioner namely, Akbor Ali @ Atabur Rahman in connection with Mikirbheta P.S. Case No. 420/2019 under Section 22(a)/25/29, NDPS Act.

¶19

Case diary as called for, has been received.

¶20

The petitioner has been in custody since 19.10.2019.

¶21

The petitioner is arrested mainly on the ground that from the premises of the Pharmacy, owned by him, recovery as well as seizure was made of 6 (six) numbers of small plastic containers containing brown colour powder, suspected to be heroine, which weighted

¶22

Page No. 2/2

¶23

10 grams with the containers and 2 grams without the containers. The quantity so recovered, is to be termed within the small quantity, under Section 22(a) the NDPS Act.

¶24

Upon consideration of the length of detention of the petitioner in connection with the present case and of the recovery and seizure already made, I find that further custodial detention of the petitioner is not necessary for the purpose of further investigation of the case.

¶25

Accordingly, the petitioner is allowed to be enlarged on bail of Rs.20,000/- with one suitable surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Morigaon, on the following conditions:

¶26

The petitioner shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the learned CJM, Morigaon without prior information to the investigating officer of the case.

¶27

The petitioner shall not hamper with the investigation or tamper with the evidence of the case, and

¶28

The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly. Make any increment, 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 policer officer.

¶29

Bail application is disposed of.

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

Comparing Assistant

Akbor Ali @ Atabur Rahman v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akbor Ali @ Atabur Rahman v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited Vs Smti Kalyani Rabha and 5 Ors.

M/S Bajaj Allianj General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Smti Kalyani Rabha and 5 Ors.

M/S Bajaj Allianj General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Smti Kalyani Rabha and 5 Ors.

Eusop Ali Vs the State of Assam

Satyajit Bodo @ Satyajit Boro Vs the State of Assam

Mominur Rahman and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam