Bozler Rahman Mondal and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

By this application, the petitioners have sought for bail in connection with PRC Case No. 214/2022 registered under Section 120(B)/212/416/417/468/341 of the IPC, Read with Section 14(a)(b) of the Foreigners Act, 1946 Read with Section 3(3) of the Passport Act read with Rule 6 of the Passport Rules, 1950. The FIR dated 07.06.2020 reveals that while raiding the house of accused no.2, the police personnel found accused no.1 and while interrogating accused no.1, it was revealed that he entered into India from Bangladesh around 15-20 years back and living at the house of petitioner no.1 and projected petitioner no.1 as his father and that he also obtained forged documents showing that he is a citizen of India. It was also alleged that accused no.1 got married to the daughter of petitioner no.2 and lived in the house of petitioner no.1.

¶19

Mr. Surajit Das, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that both the petitioners were enlarged on interim pre arrest bail vide order dated 27.08.2020 and during the pendency of the said bail application charge sheet was submitted and by order dated 07.12.2020, the said interim order was extended by 15 days so as to enable the petitioners to approach the Trial Court and move an application before the same. However, the petitioners did not move the application before the Trial Court stating that it was the Covid period time and the petitioners were never on bail and that subsequently on 27.06.2022 summons were issued from the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Hatsingimari and then vide order dated 07.02.2026, the petitioners again did not appear before the Trial Court and NBWA was issued against them.

¶20

Mr. Surajit Das, learned Counsel for the petitioners, therefore, submits that the petitioners would appear before the Trial Court and seeks bail in the mean time.

¶21

Mr R.J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State,

¶22

Page No.# 3/3

¶23

however, submits that the FIR reveals a serious matter of concerned as it is an admitted fact that the petitioners have given shelter to a person who entered into India from Bangladesh by illegal means and that he also submits that after getting interim order, the petitioners did not appear before the learned Court neither they appeared when summons were issued to them. He as such submits that the conduct of the parties shows that they will never appear before the Court below.

¶24

On consideration of the submissions made at the bar and by considering the fact that the petitioners were enlarged on interim bail and were given 15 days period to appear before the Trial Court. However, due to advent of Covid, the petitioners could not comply with the terms of the order of this Court, this Court deems it fit that the petitioners be enlarged on pre-arrest bail on furnishing of a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- each with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of SDJM, South Salmara, Mankachar under the following conditions:

¶25

i) The petitioners will appear before the Trial Court as

¶26

and when call for.

¶27

ii) The petitioners will not hamper or tamper with the

¶28

evidence or influence the witnesses connected with the case.

¶29

Petition is disposed of.

¶30

JUDGE