Mustafa Ahmed Barbhuiya Vs the State of Assam

2. This interlocutory application has been filed under Section 483(10 (b) read with Section 528 of BNSS, praying for the cancelation/modification of the bail order dated 11.10.2018, passed in Bail Application Case No. 1898/2018 [Mustafa Ahmed Barbhuiya vs. The State of Assam].

¶17

3. It is submitted by Mr. Laskar, learned counsel for the applicant, that the present applicant, along with other co-applicants, had filed connected bail application, which were accordingly allowed by the Co-Ordinate Bench vide its order dated 11.10.2018. He further submits that the applicant has been abiding by all the terms and conditions imposed upon him. However, as an advocate, the petitioner is facing difficulty in obtaining permission whenever, he has to visit other jurisdictional courts. At the same time, his wife runs a clothing business and has to travel to other states. Since she cannot go alone and they also have a minor child, the petitioner has to accompany her. He further submitted that while passing the bail order dated 11.10.2018, seven conditions were imposed in paragraph No. 34 (a) to (g) of the order. Accordingly, the present applicant has prayed for the modification of bail conditions 34 (b) and (e), which read as follows:

¶18

"(b). They shall remain present before the Court on the dates fixed for hearing of the case. If they want to remain absent, then they shall take prior permission of the court and in case of unavoidable circumstances for remaining absent, they shall immediately give intimation to the appropriate court that they may be permitted to be present

¶19

Page No.# 3/3

¶20

through the counsel; and

¶21

(e). They would not leave the territorial limits of the trial court without the written permission of the trial court.”

¶22

4. In this regard, Mr. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has raised no objection on the prayer made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶23

5. After hearing the learned counsel of both sides and considering the grounds cited in the petition, particularly the averments made in paragraph No. 7 of the instant application, the prayer for modification as sought for by the accused applicant is allowed.

¶24

6. Accordingly, the order, dated 11.10.2018, passed in Bail Application Case No. 1898/2018 modified to the extent that the condition No. (b) and (e) therein shall stand cancelled. This order shall form part of the order, dated 11.10.2018 passed in Bail Application No.1898/2018.

¶25

7. With the above direction, the interlocutory application stands disposed of.

¶26

JUDGE

¶27

Comparing Assistant

Mustafa Ahmed Barbhuiya v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mustafa Ahmed Barbhuiya 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

Sri Sankar Das Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Owahid Hussain Vs the State of Assam

Radha Raman Kundu Alias Radhamohan Dutta and Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Babu Ahmed Barbhuiya Vs the State of Assam

Santosh Paul Vs the State of Assam

Muksidul Islam Vs the State of Assam and Anr.