Allowed

Rofikul Islam v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC21 Jul 2022AB/1560/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants anticipatory bail to the petitioner apprehending arrest in a cattle recovery case under Sections 379/411 IPC and Section 13 of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021. The court observed no prima facie sufficient incriminating material requiring custodial interrogation and granted bail with local surety.

What did the court decide?

Granted pre-arrest bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 30,000 with one local surety of like amount.

Rofikul Islam Vs the State of Assam — Property and Title | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010111092022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/1560/2022

¶5

ROFIKUL ISLAM S/O NAJIM UDDIN SHEIKH R/O VILL- KUMAR GHATI, P.S. DHUBRI DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM

¶6

VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶7

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M AHMED

¶8

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶9

BEFORE

¶10

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR

¶11

ORDER

¶12

21.07.2022

¶13

Heard Mr. N. Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also Heard Ms. N Das, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State respondent.

¶14

This petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., is filed for granting the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, namely, Rofikul Islam

¶15

Page No.# 2/3

¶16

apprehending his arrest in connection with Dhubri P.S. Case No. 211/2022 registered u/s 379/411 of IPC read with Section 13 of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021.

¶17

The Case diary, as called for, is placed before the Court.

¶18

The case relates to recovery and seizure of five numbers of cattle along with one motor cycle.

¶19

Perusal of the case diary reveals prima facie no sufficient incriminating material against the petitioner requiring his custodial interrogation, subject, of course, to final outcome in investigation.

¶20

Therefore, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the petitioner, named above, shall be released on pre-arrest bail, in connection with the above noted case on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 30,000/- with one local surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject, of course, to the following conditions:

¶21

(i) That the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 7 days; failing which on and from the 8^th day, the prearrest bail order shall automatically come to end;

¶22

(ii) That the 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; and

¶23

(iii) That the petitioner shall refrain from committing any similar offence in future of which he is accused or suspected of commission.

¶24

Page No.# 3/3

¶25

Return the case diary.

¶26

This disposes off the anticipatory bail application.

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

Comparing Assistant

Rofikul Islam v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rofikul 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

Dhiraj Kumar Vs the State of Assam

Md. Fakrul Islam Vs the State of Assam

Md. Mokbul Hussain Vs the State of Assam

Abdul Karim Vs the State of Assam

Golam Hussain Vs the State of Assam

Moon Das and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam