Abdur Rousan Vs the State of Assam

This is an application filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused-applicants, namely, Abdur Rousan and Fayzur Rahman in connection with Sribhumi P.S. Case No. 11/2026, registered under Sections 314/318(4)/316(5)/336(3)/340(2)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023, read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 corresponding to GR Case No. 37/2026.

¶19

The gist of the case as is apparent from the instant anticipatory bail application is that one Ejahar was lodged on 11.01.2026 at the instance of one, namely, Shri Manish Das, in his official capacity as the Block Elementary Education officer, South Sribhumi Education Block whereby it was alleged that the accused – applicant no. 1 - Abdur Rousan, the then Headmaster of 432 No. Harikuri L.P. School and the accused – applicant no. 2 - Fayzur Rahman, the then President of the School Managing Committee of the said School misappropriated the honorarium of the Cook-cum-Helper of the said School. On receipt of the FIR, the police registered the aforesaid Sribhumi P.S. Case No. 11/2026 under the aforementioned Sections.

¶20

Mr. T.J. Mahanta, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the accused – applicants, while referring to preliminary Enquiry Report dated 10.01.2026 has submitted that though the allegation was of misappropriation of honorarium, the Enquiry Report clearly reveals that the honorarium amount of the Cook-cumHelper directly goes to the bank account which is evident from the Enquiry Report. He submits that, though there was an allegation of withdrawing the money from the bank account of one cook-cum-Helper, namely, Hafsa Begum, who died in the year 2023, the same is totally incorrect as the accused –

¶21

Page No.# 3/4

¶22

applicants in their respective capacities as Headmaster and President of the Managing Committee had already intimated about the death of the aforesaid Cook-cum-Helper way back on 18.05.2023 to the concerned DEEO. Therefore, he submits that there cannot be any occasion of misappropriation of honorarium and the action that was required to be taken on behalf of the accusedapplicants, they have already taken the same by intimating the concerned authority i.e. District Elementary Education Officer, Sribhumi.

¶23

The learned Senior Counsel appearing for accused – applicants submits that the accused applicant no.1 has already been suspended and since an inquiry has already been concluded, there may not be any requirement of the police authority to have custodial detention of the accused-applicants for further investigation in the matter. He further submits that the whole allegations are based on the documentary evidence, which are already available before the Inquiry Committee. Therefore, he submits that at this stage, the accusedapplicants should be granted the privilege of pre-arrest bail and the accusedapplicants are ready and willing to fully cooperate with the investigation in the instant case.

¶24

On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that without perusing the materials available in the Case Diary, at this stage, the anticipatory bail should not be granted to the accused-applicants.

¶25

This Court has heard the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, as well as gone through the materials brought on record in the instant anticipatory bail application. After considering the whole matter in it’s entirety and looking into allegations made in the FIR, is of the considered opinion that the above named accused-applicants should be granted the anticipatory bail as prayed for.

¶26

Page No.# 4/4

¶27

Accordingly, it is directed that the accused-applicants are to be granted the privilege of pre-arrest bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) each with two suitable sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject to the following conditions: -

¶28

(i) the accused-applicants shall appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of 10 days of passing of this order and shall co-operate with the investigation.

¶29

(ii) the accused – applicants shall make themselves available for investigation, as and when called for by the I.O.

¶30

(iii) the accused-applicants shall not, directly or indirectly, make any attempt to influence witnesses or tamper with evidence or induce any person acquainted with the facts of the case to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the police of the Court.

¶31

In view of the aforesaid directions, the instant Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of as allowed.

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

Comparing Assistant

Abdur Rousan v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdur Rousan 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

Ajit Kumar Dutta Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Laliteswar Sharma Vs Central Bureau of Investigation

Rakesh Ahammed Vs the Union of India

Kabir Ranjan Deka Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Lal Miya Ali and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Bahar Uddin Alias Bahar Vs the State of Assam