Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010076552025 2025:GAU-AS:5175 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1183/2025 MAJUMA BIBI WIFE OF MAHIRUDDIN ALI, VILL- DURAMARI, P.O. SIMBARGAON, P.S. AND DIST. KRAJHAR, BTC, ASSAM, PIN-783370 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M U MAHMUD, MR S H MAHMUD,MS. D BORA,MR S ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 29.04.2025 Heard Mr. M. U. Mahmud, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, praying for grant of bail to the accused/petitioners, who have been languishing in jail hazot since 12.03.2025 in connection with Kokrajhar P. S. Case No. 72/2025, registered under Sections 303(2)/325 of BNS, read with Section 13(1)/16 of Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021 and read with Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. 3. The Case Diary as called for, has already been received and I have perused the same. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Mahmud, that the petitioner is innocent and she is not at all involved in the alleged offence. She used to work in other households as a labourer. He further submits that the petitioner has been behind bars for the past 50 days and, therefore, considering the length of her detention, she may be released on bail. He also submits that the petitioner is still ready and willing to cooperate with the Investigating Officer in the further investigation of the case, if the privilege of bail is granted to her. 5. On the other hand, Mr. Goswami, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submits that the accused/petitioner may not have been involved in the theft of the cow but was allegedly engaged by another person for cutting the meat. Page No.# 3/3 6. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsels on both sides, as well as the materials available in the case diary, and without delving into the merits of the case and also considering her length of detention already undergone by the accused/petitioner, i.e., 50 days, I am of the view that the IO got ample opportunity to interrogate the accused/petitioner while in custody. Accordingly, further custodial interrogation does not appear to be necessary in the present case. 7. Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kokrajhar, the accused/petitioner, namely, Majuma Bibi, be enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions: (i) that the petitioner shall make herself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii) that the petitioner 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 her 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, Kokrajhar, without prior permission. 8. In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant