Allowed

Apnarul Hoque Barbhuiya and 3 Ors. v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC18 May 2022AB/817/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this anticipatory bail petition, the Gauhati High Court granted absolute bail to the petitioners who had already been granted interim bail. The court held that no prima facie sufficient incriminating material warranted custodial interrogation and allowed them to bail subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Interim pre-arrest bail granted by order dated 22.03.2022 made absolute subject to conditions of cooperation in investigation and non-inducement.

Apnarul Hoque Barbhuiya and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam — Anticipatory Bail | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010056102022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/817/2022

¶5

APNARUL HOQUE BARBHUIYA AND 3 ORS S/O LATE ABDUL KHALIK BARBHUIYA R/O VILL- RANGIRGHAT PART-III P.S. SONAI, DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM

¶6

2: SHRI MUSTAFA ZAMAL BARBHUIYA @ MOSTUFA JAMAN BARBHUIYA S/O LATE AKRAM ALI BARBHUIYA R/O VILL- DAKHIN MOHANPUR PART-VII P.S. SONAI DIST. CACHAR ASSAM

¶7

3: SHRI SAHARUL ALOM S/O AFTAB UDDIN @ KAMAL UDDIN R/O VILL- UTTAR MAHANPUR P.S. SONAI DIST. CACHAR ASSAM

¶8

4: SHRI GIAS UDDIN LASKAR S/O LATE KALA MONI LASKAR R/O VILL- MAGIRGRAM

¶9

P.S. SONAI DIST. CACHAR ASSA

¶10

VERSUS

¶11

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶12

Page No.# 2/3

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. I H LASKAR

¶14

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶15

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR

¶16

ORDER

¶17

18.05.2022

¶18

Heard Mr. N.J. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. B.B. Gogoi, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State respondent.

¶19

This petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., is filed for granting the privilege of prearrest bail to the petitioners, namely i) Apnarul Hoque Barbhuiya ii) Mustafa Zamal Barbhuiya @Mostufa Jaman Barbhuiya iii) Saharul Alom and iv) Gias Uddin Laskar , apprehending arrest in connection with Sonai P.S. Case No. 65/2022 (corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1028/2022) u/s 120B/143/448/392/427/333/353/506 of the IPC r/w Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984.

¶20

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

¶21

It may be mentioned that by order, dated 22.03.2022, this Court granted the privilege of interim pre-arrest bail to the petitioners subject to conditions.

¶22

The F.I.R. dated 10.03.2022 lodged by the B.D.O., Sonai, Cachar, reveals the allegation that on that day, a voting was conducted at Sonai Block Office for no confidence motion against the President of Swadhin Bazar GP. After completion of voting process a huge mob gathered there, which was led by the petitioner No. 3, namely Saharul Alom. The crowd apart from threatening the informant snatched away official files from his hands and also assaulted him along with some police personnel. However, the informant somehow managed to escape from the place of occurrence. It is alleged that the said mob, which included the petitioners also, destroyed official files

¶23

Page No.# 3/3

¶24

and prevented the informant from doing his lawful duty.

¶25

A Perusal of the case diary reveals that there is no prima facie sufficient incriminating material against the petitioners requiring their custodial interrogation.

¶26

The petitioners have given their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and thus, joined the investigation. There is no adverse report against them from the side of the investigating officer. The investigation has substantially progressed.

¶27

Therefore, the interim pre-arrest bail granted vide order, dated 22.03.2022 is hereby made absolute, subject to the following conditions-

¶28

(i) That the petitioners shall co-operate in investigation as and when required; and

¶29

(ii) That the petitioners 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.

¶30

Return the case diary.

¶31

This disposes of the anticipatory bail application.

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

Comparing Assistant

Apnarul Hoque Barbhuiya and 3 Ors. v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Apnarul Hoque Barbhuiya and 3 Ors. 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

Pritam Roy and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Mukesh Goyal Vs the Union of India

Bipul Dweep Chutia and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Abhijit Das Vs the State of Assam

Akash Das Vs the State of Assam

Rabi Jaiswal and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam