Allowed

Md. Moidul Ali v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC2 Sept 2022AB/1878/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court disposed of an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC. Upholding an interim order made in an earlier hearing, the Court made the order absolute, allowing the applicant bail pending the investigation into allegations of theft over a specific value.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail order made absolute in the terms and conditions laid down on 18.07.2022.

Md. Moidul Ali Vs the State of Assam — Anticipatory Bail | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010133782022

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

¶4

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

¶5

Case No. : AB/1878/2022

¶6

MD. MOIDUL ALI

¶7

S/O- MD. BABUL ALI, R/O- VILL.- BANBARIA, P.O. BHELLA, P.S. AND DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN- 781309.

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE P.P., ASSAM

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M HUSSAIN

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶12

BEFORE

¶13

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER

¶14

02.09.2022

¶15

Heard Mr A Z Ahmed, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr M Hussain, learned counsel for the accused/applicant. Also heard Mr P Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondents.

¶16

Apprehending arrest in connection with Garchuk PS Case No. 149/2022, under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is preferred by the applicant, namely, Md Moidul Ali, for grant of pre-arrest bail.

¶17

Page No.# 2/2

¶18

The said case has been registered on the basis of one FIR lodged by one Shri Chinmoy Jyoti Sarma, the then Sub-Divisional Engineer, Jalukbari Electrical Sub-Division, APDCL, on 12.05.2022, to the effect that Matleb Ali along with two unknown persons were found unauthorizedly climbing upon APDCL line and stealing line materials at Boragaon, of worth Rs. 6,700/-

¶19

Mr Ahmed, learned counsel for the accused/applicant submits that as per his instructions, the applicant has not appeared before the IO.

¶20

However, producing the Case Diary before this Court, Mr P Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the materials so far collected by the IO during investigation is inadequate to support the allegations made in the FIR.

¶21

Having heard the submissions of the learned counsels of both sides, and having carefully perused the documents placed on record and also the case diary with the assistance of Mr Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor and also in view of the nature of accusations and the punishment prescribed for the same, this Court is inclined to make the interim order dated 18.07.2022, absolute in the same terms and conditions.

¶22

In terms of above, the anticipatory bail application stands disposed of.

¶23

Return the case diary.

¶24

Comparing Assistant

Md. Moidul Ali v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Moidul 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

Safir Alom Laskar Vs the State of Assam

Rajdeep @ Rajdip Bhuyan Vs the State of Assam

Mukta Kalita @ Mukta Ram Kalita Vs the State of Assam

Md. Ali Newaz Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Md. Saddam Hussain and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Harendra Pathak Vs the State of Nagaland and Anr.