Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010094522025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1026/2025 RUHUL AMIN S/O HANNAN ALI R/O KHANGRA P.S. TARABARI DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S M ABDULLAH P, MR. S HUSSAIN,MD IMRAN,MD R ISLAM,MR. S RAHMAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 06.05.2025 1. Heard Mr. S.M.Abdullah P, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the opposite party/respondent. 2. This application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Ruhul Amin, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Basistha P.S. Case No. 920/2024 registered under Sections 61/303(2)/317(2)/ 111(2)(b) of BNS, 2023 read with Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Page No.# 2/4 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 23.12.2024, one Chinmoy Baruah, SI of Police, Jorabat Out-Post, had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Basistha Police Station, inter alia, alleging that on receipt of the secret information through the reliable sources regarding carrying of illegal fertilizer, a special Naka Checking was arranged at Jorabat and during the Naka Checking, one vehicle bearing registration No. AS-01-EC-7487 was intercepted and during search, from the seized vehicle 500 bags of urea fertilizer was recovered. After interrogation with the driver and the handyman, it was revealed that the seized urea fertilizer smuggled from Nagaon of Barpeta District without having supportive documents. Therefore, it is suspected to be stolen articles. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is nowhere involved in the alleged offence. He has also submitted that urea fertilizer which was seized in this case was not stolen. He has further submitted that the driver and the handyman have already been granted bail by this Court in Bail Application No.61/2025 on 04.02.2025. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the meanwhile, the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, (FTC) No. 3, Kamrup (M), Guwahati, has also granted bail to the owner of the godown, namely, Arfan Ali. He further submits that the petitioner is ready to co-operate in the investigation and therefore, his custodial interrogation may not be necessary. 6. On the other hand, Mr. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam prays for calling of the case diary. 7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the materials available on record. 8. On perusal of the order dated 19.03.2025 passed in A.B. No. 1/2025 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, (FTC) No.3, Kamrup (M), Guwahati, it reveals that there is an observation made in the said order that after perusal of the case diary, it appeared that the petitioner therein, namely Arfan Ali is the license holder of storing and carrying of Page No.# 3/4 urea fertilizer. Therefore, it appeared that the seized articles may not be stolen articles. However, there is nothing on record which indicates that the present petitioner is involved in this case. 9. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that if the petitioner co- operates in the investigation, his custodial detention may not be necessary. 10. Hence, this anticipatory bail application is disposed of with a direction that the above named petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer of Basistha P.S. Case No. 920/2024 within a period of 7 (seven) days from the date of this order and co- operate in the investigation. If he does so within the stipulated period of time, in the event of arrest of the petitioner in connection with the aforesaid Basistha P.S. Case No. 920/2024, he shall be allowed to go on interim bail of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority subject to the following conditions that:- (i) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation, (ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts of the case before the Investigating Officer. 11. With the above observation, this anticipatory bail application is disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Page No.# 4/4 Comparing Assistant