Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010113092025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1753/2025 FIRDOUS AHMED S/O MAINUL HOQUE R/O HOUSE NO. 47, MOTHER TERESA PATH, P.S. HATIGAON, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, PERMANENT ADDRESS- VILL- DHANTOLA, P.S. ABHAYAPURI DIST. BONGAIGAON, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S H SIKDAR, A ISLAM,MD IMRAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 09.06.2025 1. Heard Mr. S. H. Sikdar, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. P. Goswami, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. Page No.# 2/4 2. This application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Firdous Ahmed, who has been detained behind the bars since 21.05.2025 (for the last 19 days) in connection with Hatigaon P. S. Case No. 96/2025 under Sections 316(2)/318(4) of the BNS, 2023. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 21-05-2025, one Rejina Begum had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Hatigaon Police Station, inter-alia, alleging that one Mahindra Thar vehicle, bearing Registration No. AS-01-GA-7707 was given to the petitioner for some emergency purpose for a few days. 4. However, after some days when the car was asked to be handed over, it was informed that the same is in Meghalaya and the car was not returned back to the claimant. 5. It is alleged in the FIR that the car has been stolen by the present petitioner. 6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has a car rental club with the name and style of Asian Car Club and he also had a trade license for the same, he used to rent a car to the customer. 7. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the son of the informant, Rejina Begum, namely, Riyajul Majib, and another person had approached the petitioner with the car of the informant and an agreement was made to this effect. 8. It is also submitted that on the request of the son of the petitioner, the car was given on rent to one Oinam Suresh Singh. 9. However, he has not yet returned back the said car and he is also not Page No.# 3/4 traceable. 10. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and it is the other co-accused, namely, Oinam Suresh Singh, who is presently having the possession of the car. 11. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the FIR was lodged after a lapse of about eight months. He also submits that he is ready to cooperate with the investigation. 12. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the grant of bail and has produced the case diary of Hatigaon P. S. Case No. 96/2025 and has submitted that the stolen car is yet to be recovered and one of the accused, Oinam Suresh Singh, with whose possession the car is presently there, is not traceable and the investigation is going on. 13. I have gone through the case diary, which was produced before me by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and has considered the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides. 14. It appears from the record that as of now, the police knows that the car is in possession of another accused, namely, Oinam Suresh Singh. However, it is unable to locate his present location. 15. In the meanwhile, the police have recorded statements of relevant witnesses. 16. Considering the above facts, this Court is of the view that if the petitioner cooperates in the investigation, his further custody and interrogation may not be necessary for a fair completion of the investigation. 17. In view of the above, the above-mentioned petitioner is hereby allowed to go on bail of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only), with one suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Page No.# 4/4 Kamrup (Metro) subject to the following conditions: i. That the petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation. ii. That 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. 18. This bail application is, accordingly disposed of. 19. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant