Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

1945 DAILYLAW 2 (GAU)

SANIDUL ISLAM v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

AB/1945/2026 · 2026-08-20

Anjan Moni Kalita

body1945

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010174482026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1945/2026 SANIDUL ISLAM S/O SOMIR SHEIKH VILL SALPARA MOLANDUBI PART-I PO AND PS KRISHNAI DIST GOALPARA, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A M KHAN, R. ALI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER 21.08.2026 1. Heard Mr. N. C. Das, learned counsel for the accused applicant. Also heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State. 2. This application has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for granting pre-arrest bail to the accused applicant in Page No.# 2/3 connection with Azara P.S. Case No. 111/2026 under Section 305(a) of the BNS. 3. An FIR was lodged by one, Dhrubajyoti Das before the Officer-in-charge of Borjhar P.S., Azara, on 23.07.2026 alleging that some miscreants travelling in a dark grey Alto car bearing No. AS-01FH-4794 at around 5 a.m., stole their dog from the owner of the house of his uncle. On receipt of FIR, Police registered Azara P.S. Case No. 111/2026. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the accused applicant submits that the accused applicant is the owner of the vehicle and the same has been given on rent to one, Sengjan Marak by way of executing an agreement. He also submits that the accused applicant has no knowledge and is not involved in this incident 5. On the other hand, Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer of the accused applicant in this instant case. 6. Taking into account the allegations in the FIR and the considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that the accused applicant should be granted pre- arrest bail. Accordingly, the accused applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 30,000/- with a surety of like nature to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority subject to the following conditions that:- (i) The accused applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 7 days from today; (ii) The accused applicant co-operate with the investigation and make himself available as and when called for by the Investigating Officer; and (iii) The accused applicant shall not try to Page No.# 3/3 tamper or hamper with the investigation in whatsoever manner. 7. In terms of the aforesaid directions, this pre-arrest bail application is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant