Allowed

Babidul Islam v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC13 Mar 2019Bail Appln./558/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application under Section 439 Cr.PC, the Gauhati High Court granted bail to Babidul Islam charged under Section 379 IPC. Considering the 96-day period of detention and the case being posted for evidence, the court ordered bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000.

What did the court decide?

Granted bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000 with one suitable surety of the like amount.

Babidul Islam Vs the State of Assam — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010055222019

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

¶4

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

¶5

Case No. : Bail Appln. 558/2019

¶6

1:BABIDUL ISLAM

¶7

S/O NURUL ISLAM, R/O VILLAGE GOROIMARI (CHATA), PS TARABARI, DIST BARPETA, ASSAM 781305

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PP ASSAM

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S C BISWAS

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶12

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Date : 13-03-2019

¶15

This is an application, filed under Section 439 Cr.PC, praying for bail of the accusedpetitioner, namely, Babidul Islam, in connection with Barpeta Road PS Case No. 679/2018 under Section 379 IPC.

¶16

Heard Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner as well as Ms. S.H. Bora, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the state respondent. Perused the petition as well as the annexures furnished therewith.

¶17

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the accused-petitioner that charge-sheet has been filed against the accused-petitioner under Section 379 IPC and he has been in custody for 96 days as on date, and therefore, on consideration of length of detention, he has sought bail for the accused-petitioner.

¶18

On perusal of the materials placed before this court, it is found that the case has been posted for evidence by the learned court below. In spite of the fact that charge-sheet has been filed

¶19

Page No.# 2/2

¶20

under Section 379 IPC, yet, considering the period of detention of the accused-petitioner for 96 days as on date, he is granted bail, on his furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with one suitable surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barpeta, on the following conditions :

¶21

(1) The accused-petitioner shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barpeta, without prior written permission from the said learned court,

¶22

(2) The accused-petitioner shall not hamper with the investigation, or tamper with the evidence of the case, and

¶23

(3) The accused-petitioner 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.

¶24

The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barpeta, shall be at liberty to put any other conditions deems appropriate, in addition to the conditions, mentioned above. The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶25

JUDGE

¶26

Comparing Assistant

Babidul Islam v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babidul Islam 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

Soidur Rahman @ Monu Vs the State of Assam

Alauddin Sk. and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Nayankamal Nath Vs the State of Assam

Shri Dwijendralal Suklabaidya Vs Smti Sabita Rani Suklabaidya

Seema Begum Vs the State of Assam

Sariful Hussain Vs the State of Assam