Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010096012025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1466/2025 PARMESWAR CHAUHAN @ CHOUHAN AND ANR. S/O SRI SWAMINATH CHAUHAN R/O VILL- MAINAPATHAR P.O. MAINAPATHAR,P.S.HOJAI PIN-782435 DIST. HOJAI, ASSAM 2: PROBES @ PRABESH @ PROBESH CHAUHAN @CHOUHAN S/O SRI SWAMINATH CHAUHAN R/O VILL- MAINAPATHAR P.O. MAINAPATHAR P.S.HOJAI PIN-782435 DIST. HOJAI ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N B P SINGHA, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 19.05.2025 Page No.# 2/5 1. Heard Mr. N. B. P. Singpho, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. This application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioners namely, 1) Parmeswar Chauhan@Chouhan and 2) Sri Probes@Prabesh@Probesh Chauhan@Chouhan, who are detained behind the bars since 01.05.2025, in connection with Hojai Police Station Case No.123/2025 under Section 303(2) of BNS, 2023. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 26.04.2025, one Nitumoni Bhatachyara, Inspector of Excise, Hojai, had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Hojai Police Station, inter alia, alleging that on 26.04.2025 at about 2.00 a.m after receiving the information regarding theft of 2(two) vehicles, the accused person named in the FIR, namely, Md. Sah Alom was caught red-handed while he was stealing the vehicle bearing Registration No. AS02T4075 (Tata Sumo) and another vehicle bearing Registration No. AS02CC8605(Tata Pick Up Yodha). 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that both the above petitioners are innocent and are not named in the FIR. He submits that both the petitioners are arrested on the basis of statement of the named accused in the FIR. He also submits that the petitioners are falsely implicated by the named accused. 5. He also submits that as regards the petitioner no.2 Probes@Prabesh@Probesh Chauhan@Chouhan is concerned, he got married only on 25.04.2025, i.e the day prior to the date of alleged Page No.# 3/5 incident and it is unbelievable that after a day of his marriage and before the reception of his marriage he would indulge in theft of vehicle. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners has also submitted that the accused petitioner no.1, who is a driver by profession was busy in driving the vehicle of one of the candidate of the Panchayat election namely, Ram Nath Chauhan from 25.04.2025 to 04.05.2025, and therefore he submits that he is also not involve in the offence alleged in the FIR. 7. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the Case Diary of Hojai Police Station Case No.123/2025, and has submitted that the petitioner were the accomplice with the main accused who was apprehended red handed as they were involved in organized crime of stealing in the vehicles on earlier occasion also. He also submits that after the theft of vehicle, the main accused used to handover the same to the petitioners. He therefore, opposes the grant of bail to the petitioners. He also submits that there are other co-accused persons involved in the offence who are yet to be arrested. He therefore, prays for rejecting the prayer of bail of the present petitioners. 8. I have considered the submissions, made by learned counsel for both the sides and have perused the materials available in the Case Diary. It appears from record that in the instant case the accused Md. Sah Alom was apprehended red handed while committing theft of 2(two) vehicles which were recovered later on from him. The said incident occurred on 26.04.2025. It also appears that apart from the statement of the co- accused Md. Sah Alom, that the present petitioners used to help him in commission of similar offences on earlier occasion also, nothing else is there in the record to indicate that in the instant case also i.e. in the theft Page No.# 4/5 of the 2(two) vehicles, namely, Tata Sumo and Tata Pick Up Yodha, there is any involvement of present petitioners. Though there may be strong suspicion against the petitioners of having conspired with the main accused in commission of the alleged offence, however, it appears that the accusation of conspiracy is not there in the FIR, neither any provision regarding criminal conspiracy has yet been added in the instant case. 9. Under such circumstances, this Court is of considered opinion that further custodial detention of the petitioners in Hojai Police Station Case No.123/2025 is not justified if the petitioners co-operate in the investigation. 10. In view of the above, both the above named petitioners are allowed to go on bail of Rs.30,000/-(Rupees Thirty Thousand only) each with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Hojai, with following conditions : i) That the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement threat or promise to the victim or to the listed witnesses of this case so as to dissuade them from deposing against them in the said trial. ii) The petitioners shall co-operate in the trial. 11. Send back the Case Diary. 12. This bail application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Page No.# 5/5 Comparing Assistant