Allowed

Hazrat Osman Gani and Anr. v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC11 Nov 2022Bail Appln./3007/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court granted bail to two accused-petitioners detained in the Margherita P.S. Case. The court held that further custodial detention appears unwarranted after reviewing the case diary and prior orders, directing the release upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 30,000 each with one surety.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on bond of Rs. 30,000 each with one surety of like amount to the Judicial Magistrate.

Hazrat Osman Gani and Anr. Vs the State of Assam — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No. 1/3

¶2

GAHC010229472022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : Bail Appln./3007/2022

¶5

HAZRAT OSMAN GANI AND ANR S/O HOSEN ALI R/O VILL- GAROJAN P.S. LAKHIPUR, DIST. GAROJAN P.S. LAKHIPUR, DIST. GOALPARA, ASSAM, PIN-783310

¶6

2: SOFIKUL ISLAM S/O HOSEN ALI R/O VILL- GAROJAN P.S. LAKHIPUR DIST. GAROJAN P.S. LAKHIPUR DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM PIN-78331 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶7

Advocate for the Petitioner : G UDDIN

¶8

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶9

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN

¶10

ORDER

¶11

Date : 11-11-2022

¶12

Heard Mr. A.K. Azad, learned counsel for the accused-petitioners and also heard Mr. B.B. Gogoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State of Assam.

¶13

Page No. 2/3

¶14

This application under Section 439, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [CrPC], is preferred by accused-petitioners, namely, [1] Hazrat Osman Gani and [2] Sofikul Islam, who have been languishing in jail hazot in connection with the Margherita P.S. Case No. 251/2022, under Sections 120B/302/201/379, Indian Penal Code [IPC] read with Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act [PDPPA], 1984 , for granting bail.

¶15

The aforementioned case has been registered on the basis of one FIR lodged by Jyotish Phukan, Sub-Inspector of Police, Ledo Police Out Post on 19.09.2022 to the effect that acting on a tip off, he along with SDPO Margherita proceeded to Malugaon under Margherita Police Station near in Assam – Arunachal Pradesh Border have found 5 [five] persons, namely, [1] Moizzall Ali, [2] Israr Ali, [3] Mustafa Sheikh, [4] Altaf Ali and [5] Hussain Ali and came to know from them that last night 3 [three] of their associates, namely, [1] Sahidul Islam, [2] Hussain Ali and [3] Asmot Ali died due to suffocation while they were working in a coal mine near Malugaon and thereafter, as per instruction of Janwang Haseng @ David, they have buried the dead body of the 3 [three] persons secretly and the aforementioned labours were brought to the said coal mine by one Md. Amir Khan, who happens to be the business partner of Janwang Haseng @ David.

¶16

Mr. Azad, learned counsel for the accused-petitioners submits that the 3 [three] persons died in the coal mine due to suffocation and though the case is registered under Sections 120B/302/201/379, IPC read with Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act [PDPPA], 1984 yet no offence under Section 302, IPC is made out here in this case and that the accused-petitioners all behind the bar for 49 [forty-nine] days and one of the co-accused has already been enlarged on bail by this Court in Bail Application No. 2675/2022, vide order dated 03.11.2022, and therefore, Mr. Azad contended to allow the accused-petitioners to go on bail.

¶17

On the other hand, Mr. Gogoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam producing

¶18

Page No. 3/3

¶19

the case diary before this Court submits that as per the inquest report, the 3 [three] persons was died due to suffocation.

¶20

Having heard the submission of learned Advocates for both sides, I have carefully gone through the petition and the materials placed on record and also perused the order dated 03.11.2022 in Bail Application No. 2675/2022 passed by this Court and also perused the case diary with the assistance of Mr. Gogoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam.

¶21

In view of the materials collected so far as the case diary and also in view of the period of detention, further custodial detention of the accused-petitioners seems to be unwarranted herein this case and therefore, this Court is inclined to allow this petition. It is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 30,000/- [Rupees thirty thousand] only each, with one surety each of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate [SDJM], Margherita, the accused-petitioners, namely, [1] Hazrat Osman Gani and [2] Sofikul Islam, be enlarged on bail, in connection with the in connection with the Margherita P.S. Case No. 251/2022, under Sections 120B/302/201/379, IPC read with Section 3 of the PDPPA Act.

¶22

In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of.

¶23

JUDGE

¶24

Comparing Assistant

Hazrat Osman Gani and Anr. v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hazrat Osman Gani and Anr. 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

The Central Bureau of Investigation Vs Hitesh Baruah and 2 Ors.

The Central Bureau of Investigation Vs Nawajyoti Sharma and 3 Ors.

Utpal Doley Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Bidhu Bhushan Vs Gautam Das and 2 Ors.

Dipu Moni Das Vs the State of Assam

Chandan Borah Vs the State of Assam