Allowed

Md. Anuwar Hussain v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC5 Aug 2024Bail Appln./1865/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court allowed a bail application filed by Md. Anuwar Hussain, accused under sections 341, 394, and 506 of the IPC. The petitioners counsel argued that the petitioner was already in jail and could not have committed dacoity with others, which the court accepted as true.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is enlarged on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 50,000 with suitable sureties and complying with court conditions.

Md. Anuwar Hussain Vs the State of Assam — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010126882024

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : Bail Appln./1865/2024

¶5

MD. ANUWAR HUSSAIN S/O NUR JAMAN R/O VILL- JAHAJAN P.S. JURIYA DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, GOVT. OF ASSAM

¶8

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. G BORAH,

¶9

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

¶10

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND

¶11

ORDER

¶12

Date : 06-08-2024

¶13

Heard Ms. G. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner Md. Anuwar Hussain, who has filed this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with prayer for bail as he is behind bars since 01.06.2024 in connection with Boko Police Station Case No. 190/2024 under

¶14

Page No.# 2/3

¶15

Sections 341/394/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860

¶16

Heard Mr. R.R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the respondent State. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the petitioner was behind bars in connection with another case when the present FIR was registered earlier.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as the petitioner was behind bars at the time of the incident, it was not possible that he was involved in a dacoity with a gang, who also has antecedents of committing dacoity. The petitioner was shown as arrested as he was suspected to be a member of a gang with antecedents of committing dacoity on the Highway.

¶18

The allegation that the petitioner is involved in committing dacoity of 320 kg of sugar is absolutely false.

¶19

I have considered the submissions at the bar with circumspection. I have also scrutinized the Case Diary. It appears that further custodial detention may not be required for the progress of investigation. I have considered the submission that the petitioner has pledged to cooperate with the investigation.

¶20

Considering all aspects and in view of my foregoing discussions, petition is allowed.

¶21

The petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the Eleka Magistrate under the conditions that:

¶22

(i) The petitioner shall refrain from such activities with which he is alleged.

¶23

(ii) The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation.

¶24

(iii) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior

¶25

Page No.# 3/3

¶26

permission.

¶27

On breach of any of the bail conditions, bail order shall stand cancelled.

¶28

In the above terms, this Bail Application stands disposed of.

¶29

Send back the Case Diary.

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

Comparing Assistant

Md. Anuwar Hussain v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Anuwar Hussain 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

Ajit Das Vs the State of Assam

Yusuf Ali and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

The General Manager( La and Coord) Vs Ilabati Deb and Ors.

Praveen Kothari and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Jesmina Parbin Vs Abdus Sattar

Sandeep Kr Nahata, Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.