Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

1996 DAILYLAW 269 (GAU)

SIKANDAR ALI, v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

AB/1996/2026 · 2026-09-07

Sanjeev Kumar Sharma

body1996

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010179392026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1996/2026 SIKANDAR ALI, SON OF LATE ABDUL KARIM, RESIDENT OF AMINPATTY, RAHMAT NAGAR, P.S. NAGAON SADAR, DISTRICT NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN - 782001. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. ARIF AHMED, A K HALDAR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 08.09.2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, for granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in connection with Nagaon P. S. Case No. 583/2026, registered under Sections 299/ 196(1) of the BNSS, 2023, read with Section 13(1) of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021. 3. Case diary as called for has been received. 4 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the offending articles have been seized by the IO and there is no necessity of custodial interrogation of the petitioner, who is ready to cooperate with the investigation. 5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, submits that the slaughter house was situated within a range of 5 kms from different places of worship including Namghars, Kali Mandir etc., and that the area is predominantly inhabited by members of the Hindu and Sikh communities. 6. The laboratory report has not been received so as to indicate whether the alleged offending article was beef. 7. Having regard to the nature of the allegation and the fact that the articles have been seized and the investigation is also at an Page No.# 3/3 advance stage, pending for receipt of the laboratory report, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be necessary. Accordingly, the prayer for pre-arrest bail is allowed. 8. In view of the above, it is directed that in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- with 2 (two) sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority in connection with the aforesaid case. 9. It is further directed that the petitioner shall appear before the IO within a period of 10 days from today and co-operate with the investigation. 10. Resultantly, the anticipatory bail application stands allowed and disposed of. 11. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant