Allowed

Mujammil Ali @ Mojamil Ali v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC20 Nov 2020Bail Appln./2499/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the petitioner in an IPC case involving theft and cheating where the stolen vehicle was already recovered, concluding that further custodial detention was not necessary for investigation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 40,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of appearance and non-interference.

Mujammil Ali @ Mojamil Ali Vs the State of Assam — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2020)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010158532020

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : Bail Appln./2499/2020

¶5

MUJAMMIL ALI @ MOJAMIL ALI S/O JONAB ALI, VILL-NO. 1 BHOURAGURI, P.S.-BIJNI, DIST-CHIRANG, ASSAM

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

¶8

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M A MONDAL

¶9

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶10

BEFORE

¶11

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK

¶12

ORDER

¶13

20-11-2020

¶14

Heard Mr. M.A. Mandal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. T. K. Mishra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State.

¶15

By this application under Section 439 CrPC the petitioner, namely, Mujammil Ali @ Mojamil Ali is seeking bail in Manikpur P.S. Case No. 391/2020 registered under Sections 328/379/34 of the IPC, wherein he was arrested on 12.10.2020 and since then, he is in custody.

¶16

Page No.# 2/3

¶17

As per the FIR of the case dated 09.10.2020, lodged by the informant, few unknown persons on 08.10.2020 around 01:30 p.m., took his E- Rickshaw on hire on a fare of Rs.400/from Patiladaha market to Bijni so as to bring some articles to be purchased and to return to Patiladaha market again. On the way to Bijni those three unknown persons gave the informant who was driving his E- Rickshaw to drink “Maza”, mixed with something. After consuming the same, the informant become unconscious and those three accused persons took away his E- Rickshaw and the mobile handset from his pocket. The informant thereafter, on 09.10.2020 lodged the FIR before the authority of Manikpur Police Station which was accordingly registered as Manikpur P.S. Case No. 391/2020 under Sections 328/379/34 of the IPC.

¶18

The petitioner along with another was arrested on 12.10.2020 in connection with said Manikpur P.S. Case No. 391/2020 and since then in custody.

¶19

Perused the Forwarding Report dated 12.10.2020 annexed with this petition as Annexure-2, which goes to show that the stolen E- Rickshaw of the informant was already recovered from the accused petitioner and another and they were arrested in the case.

¶20

It is also noticed from the said Forwarding Report that police sought for remand of the accused petitioner for only 2 days enabling the police to complete the investigation of the case.

¶21

As the stolen vehicle has already been recovered and considering the period of his detention in custody since 12.10.2020, this Court is of the view that further custodial detention of the petitioner is not warranted to investigate the said Manikpur P.S. Case No. 391/2020.

¶22

Accordingly, the petitioner, namely, Mujammil Ali @ Mojamil Ali shall be released on bail in connection with said Manikpur P.S. Case No. 391/2020 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 40,000/- with two local sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bongaigaon on conditions that the petitioner (i) shall appear before the Investigating Officer of said Manikpur P.S. Case No. 391/2020 as and when he is required for necessary investigation of the case; (ii) shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the Manikpur Police Station, without obtaining prior written permission from the concerned

¶23

Page No.# 3/3

¶24

Investigating Officer of the case; (iii) shall not hamper with the investigation, or tamper with the evidence of the case and (iv) he 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

¶25

Any violation of the aforesaid terms and conditions by the petitioner, named above, the bail granted to him in the aforementioned Manikpur P.S. Case No. 391/2020 shall stand automatically vacated.

¶26

Bail application is accordingly stands allowed.

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

Comparing Assistant

Mujammil Ali @ Mojamil Ali v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mujammil Ali @ Mojamil Ali 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

Eusufuddin Ahmed Vs the State of Assam

Kusum Pradhan and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Vikash Chandra Vs the State of Assam

Nabajyoti Baishya Vs the State of Assam

Md. Harkan Ali Vs the State of Assam

Siddique Ahmed Vs the State of Assam