Imran Ahmed Vs the State of Assam

2. This application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Imran Ahmed, who has been detained behind the bars since 01.07.2025 (for last 17 days) in connection with Baihata P.S. Case No. 166/2025

¶14

Page No.# 2/3

¶15

under Sections 299/196 of BNS read with Section 13(1) of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021.

¶16

3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 01.07.2025 one D. Nath, SI of Police had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-charge of Baihata Chariali Police Station, inter alia, alleging that on receipt of an information through reliable sources regarding illegal selling of beef in a hotel, namely, Mughal Garden, Sahee Darbar and Bismillah Hotel located at Nagaon PWD Road, a search was made and 32 kg was suspected beef meat was recovered from there.

¶17

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been detained behind bars for last 17 days and though he had approached before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kamrup, Rangia seeking bail, however, his prayer was rejected merely on the grounds that the offence is triable exclusively by the Court of Sessions. She submits that considering the period of detention and nature of the offence, the petitioner may be allowed to go on bail. She also submits that the petitioner is ready to co-operate in the investigation.

¶18

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail at this stage and has prayed for calling of the case diary.

¶19

6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides.

¶20

7. In this case, the beef meat has already been recovered and seized. The petitioner has been detained behind the bars for last 17 days.

¶21

8. Considering the nature of the offence involved in this case and the period of detention undergone, this Court is of considered opinion that further

¶22

Page No.# 3/3

¶23

custodial detention of the petitioner may not be necessary for fair completion of the investigation of Baihata P.S. Case No. 166/2025, if the petitioner co-operates in the investigation.

¶24

9. In view of the above, the above named petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of the learned Elaka Magistrate with following conditions:-

¶25

(i) That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts of the case before the Investigating Officer;

¶26

(ii) That the petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation;

¶27

10. This bail application is accordingly disposed of.

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Imran Ahmed v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Imran Ahmed v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dipu Mahanta Vs the State of Assam

Monsing Mochahari Vs the State of Assam

Nimaha Narzary Vs the State of Assam

Hamedur Islam @ Hamidur Islam Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Amanur Rahman Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Bedabrata Saikia Vs the State of Assam