Hafijur Miya Vs the State of Assam — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2025)

Hafijur Miya Vs the State of Assam — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Conditional bail - petitioner enlarged on bail of Rs. 30,000/- with a surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M), subject to fortnightly reporting to the I/O until completion of investigation, abstention from the alleged activities, and non-tampering with evidence.

Issue for consideration

Whether petitioner Hafijur Miya, behind bars since 12.05.2025 in connection with Basistha P.S Case No. 255/2025 under Section 316(3) of the B.N.S, 2023, should be enlarged on bail under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S, 2023, despite prosecution objections of deep involvement, incriminating Case Diary materials and risk of adverse effect on the ongoing investigation.

Court's answer

Further custodial detention may not be required as the investigation has progressed substantially, and bail may accordingly be granted to the petitioner.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is enlarged on bail of Rs. 30,000/- with a suitable surety of like amount, to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M), subject to specified conditions.

Key takeaways

The bail carries conditions: (1) the petitioner shall appear before the I/O on every fortnight till completion of the investigation; (2) he shall refrain from such activities with which he is alleged; and (3) he shall not tamper with the evidence.ratio¶20
On breach of any of the aforementioned bail conditions, the Court is at liberty to cancel the bail granted to the petitioner.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (order dated 17.06.2025, Mrs. Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund, single Judge): Application under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S, 2023 for bail by Hafijur Miya, in custody since 12.05.2025 in Basistha P.S Case No. 255/2025 under Section 316(3) of the B.N.S, 2023. The Additional Public Prosecutor objected, stating the petitioner's deep involvement was available in the Case Diary, that incriminating materials existed against him, that the investigation was still under progress and could be prejudiced, and that he was allegedly involved in hijacking a vehicle containing stolen articles to Shillong by diverting it from its original destination, Silchar. Weighing the submissions that the main arrested accused had already been granted bail, that the petitioner was forwarded on a co-accused's statement, had co-operated with the investigation and offered to abide by stringent conditions, and finding further custodial detention unnecessary as the investigation had substantially progressed, the Judge enlarged the petitioner on bail of Rs. 30,000/- with a surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M), subject to: fortnightly appearance before the I/O until completion of investigation; refraining from the alleged activities; and non-tampering with evidence; breach permitting cancellation of bail. The Case Diary was directed to be sent back.

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010124682025

undefined

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

Case No. : Bail Appln./1904/2025

HAFIJUR MIYA S/O- HATTAR MIYA, R/O- NEAR HOCKEY STADIUM, P.S- BASISTHA, DIST-KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM, PIN-781029

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR PARAM HANGKHA KONWAR, SADDAM HUSSAIN,MR. D GOGOI,MR S BORTHAKUR

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND

ORDER

Date : 17.06.2025

Heard learned counsel Mr. S Bothakur for the petitioner Sri. Hafijur Miya who has filed this application under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S, 2023 with prayer for bail as he is behind bars since 12.05.2025 in connection with Basistha P.S Case No. 255/2025 under Section 316(3) of the B.N.S, 2023.

Page No.# 2/3

Heard Mr. B Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam.

Mr. B Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam has raised serious objections stating that the petitioner’s deep involvement is available in the Case Diary. There are incriminating materials in the Case Diary against the petitioner and he is not entitled to bail. It is submitted that investigation is still under progress and may be adversely affected if the petitioner is enlarged on bail. The petitioner is involved in hijacking the vehicle containing stolen articles to Shillong by diverting from its original destination i.e. Silchar.

I have considered the submissions at the bar with circumspection. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the main accused who have been arrested in connection with this case has already been granted bail. On the statement of the co-accused, this petitioner was forwarded to custody and he has co-operated with the investigation. I have considered the submission that the petitioner is willing to cooperate with the remaining part of the investigation and to abide by any stringent bail conditions if imposed upon him.

It appears that bail may be granted to the petitioner. It appears that further custodial detention may not be required as investigation has progresses substantially. Considering all aspects, the petitioner is enlarged on bail of Rs 30,000/- with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup(M) under the conditions that :

(1) The petitioner shall appear before the I/O on every fortnight till the completion of the investigation.

(2) The petitioner shall refrain from such activities with which he is alleged, and

(3) The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence.

On breach of any the aforementioned bail conditions, the Court is at liberty to cancel the bail granted to the petitioner.

Send back the Case Diary.

Page No.# 3/3

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant