Single judge rejected the petitioner's pre-arrest bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for alleged theft of cattle, holding that prima facie incriminating evidence existed and investigation remained incomplete.
Pre-arrest bail application stands rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010135802022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/1899/2022
MD. CHAMAR ALI
S/O AHAMAD ALI, R/O VILL-KHA PANIGAON, P.S.-JAMUGURIHAT, DISTSONITPUR, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. T CHUTIA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR
ORDER
14.09.2022
Heard Mr. T. Chutia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mrs. S. H. Bora, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State respondent.
This petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., is filed for granting the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, namely, Md. Chamar Ali, apprehending his arrest in connection with Jamuguri P.S. Case No. 23/2022 registered u/s
Page No.# 2/3
379 of the IPC read with Section 13 of Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021.
The Case diary, as called for, is placed before the Court.
Mr. T. Chutia, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is the owner of the seized cattle, which he purchased from Biswanath Chariali Cattle Market, under Biswanath Zila Parishad and transported to Jamngurihat for agricultural and animal husbandry purposes. Mr. Chutia, therefore, submits that the seized cattle were not stolen from anybody and as such, none has claimed ownership of the same.
Mrs. S. H. Borah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, fairly submits that the case diary reveals that there is sufficient prima facie incriminating evidence against the petitioner.
The case relates to recovery and seizure of 7(seven) numbers of cattle which were brought illegally without any valid documents from Biswanath Chariali for the purpose of business.
On scrutiny of the case diary, it is interalia, revealed that neither the owner of the seized vehicle nor that of the seized cattle has come forward to show their documents. On the other hand, it is noticed that although the petitioner has claimed to be the owner of the seized cattle by purchase, not a single cash memo is annexed with the instant petition. On the other hand, the investigation is also yet to be completed.
Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the pre-arrest bail application stands rejected.
Return the case diary.
Page No.# 3/3
This disposes of the anticipatory bail application.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail pursuant to Section 438 Cr.P.C. given the lack of prima facie evidence of theft and incomplete investigation.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Md. Chamar Ali
The State of Assam Represented by the Public Prosecutor, Assam
Ajit Borthakur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
