The Gauhati High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner under Section 439 CrPC in a theft and ATM vandalism case, noting long detention and lack of necessity for custodial interrogation.
Petitioner allowed bail on bond of Rs.20,000 with one suitable surety on furnishing of specified conditions.
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
GAHC010199092022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./2525/2022
MD. SADIK ALI S/O MD. ALALLUDDIN R/O VILL- BARCHALA GAON P.S. LALUK DIST. LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. S G BARUAH
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
ORDER
14.11.2022
Heard Ms. S.G. Baruah, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. N. Das, learned APP appearing for the State.
The petitioner, who was arrested on 13.09.2022 in connection with North
Page No.# 2/3
Lakhimpur P.S. Case No. 1001/2021 corresponding G.R. Case No. 2227/2021 under Sections 457/380/427 IPC is seeking regular bail under section 439 Cr.P.C.
The learned Addl. P.P. has produced the case diary.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for bail on the grounds of length of detention.
It is submitted that the petitioner has been roped in connection with this case after being shown as arrested while he was in custody initially in connection with Naharlagun P.S. Case No. 95/2022 and thereafter, Narayanpur P.S. Case No. 50/2022.
The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has vandalised the SBI ATM’s and has committed theft of Rs. 29,18,000/- from the SBI, ATM at North Lakhimpur.
I have perused the case diary.
There are cogent materials in the case dairy against the petitioner. He has been languishing in jail for 62 days.
The learned Addl. P.P. has objected to the prayer for bail on the ground that there are sufficient materials against the petitioner and he is involved in a series of similar offences and the money has not been recovered.
I have considered the length of detention and the progress of
Page No.# 3/3
investigation. Further, custodial detention for the sake of investigation does not appear to be necessary. It appears that if the accused person is enlarged on bail, investigation may not be affected.
Considering all aspects, the petitioner, namely, Md. Sadik Ali is allowed to go on bail in connection with the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- with one suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, North Lakhimpur.
The bail is granted on the following conditions:
Case diary is returned.
The application stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether petitioner deserves regular bail in a theft/mischief case considering length of detention and non-example.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
MD. SADIK ALI
THE STATE OF ASSAM
SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
