Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010067932025 2025:GAU-AS:3897 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1007/2025 RASIDUL HAQUE AND ANR S/O ASHRAF ALI, VILL- BADULIPARA, P.O.- MOIDAMIA, P.S.- NORTH LAKHIMPUR, DIST- LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM 2: TAJAL ISLAM S/O KABIL ALI VILL- NO. 2 ISLAMPUR P.S.- NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST- LAKHIMPUR ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR N ZAMAN, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 02.04.2025 Heard Mr. S. Munir, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. A. K. Purkayastha, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. This is an application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of bail to the accused/petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with Bihpuria P.S. Case No. 30/2025, under Sections 331(4)/305(b)/317(4)/111/313 of BNS, 2023 read with Sections 11(a)(d)(e) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act read with Section 13(1) of Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021. Though the case is at the stage of motion, the Case Diary is perused as it was available before this Court which was called for in connection with other related cases. Mr. Munir, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that the only allegation against the present petitioner No. 1 is that he provided vehicle to the co-accused wherefrom the cattle were alleged to have been recovered and apart from that, he is not connected in the alleged offence. He further submitted that the accused/petitioner No. 2 purchased 2 (two) numbers of cattle on a bona fide belief and he was not aware that the said cattle were stolen one. Further he submitted that the accused/petitioners are in custody Page No.# 3/4 since 18.03.2025 and thus, the I.O. got sufficient opportunity to interrogate them keeping in custody. However, they are ready and willing to co-operate the I.O. in further investigation of the case if they are granted with the privilege of bail. Mr. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submitted that from the materials available in the Case Diary, it is seen that the accused/petitioner No. 1 hired the vehicle from other person which was provided to the co-accused person for committing the offence. Further he submitted that the petitioner No. 2 purchased 2 (two) numbers of cattle from a person without making any enquiry about the person or the cattle and thus, it reveals from the materials available in the Case Diary that he was aware that the cattle which were purchased by him were the stolen cattle. Accordingly, Mr. Baruah raised objection and submitted that further custodial interrogation of the present accused/petitioners may be required for the purpose of investigation. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for both sides, materials available in the Case Diary and also considering the length of detention already undergone by the accused/petitioners, I find that further custodial interrogation of the accused/petitioners seems to be not necessary for the purpose of investigation. Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only each with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur, the accused/ petitioners, namely, (i) Rasidul Haque & (ii) Tajal Islam, Page No.# 4/4 be enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions: (i) that the petitioners shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii) that the petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and (iii) that the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur, without prior permission. In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant