Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010136172025 2025:GAU-AS:11984 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1421/2025 JAHANGIR ALOM S/O SAMAD ALI VILL- POKAMARI CHAR, P.O. AMCO ROAD, P.S. AND DIST. DHUBRI VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ, A S CHOUDHURY,MR A W AMAN,MR. SURAJIT DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 03.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. S. Das, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam. Page No.# 2/4 2. This application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Jahangir Alom, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Dhubri P.S. Case No. 314/2022, under Sections 379/411 of IPC, 1860 read with Section 13 of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021 corresponding to PRC Case No. 62/2024. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the aforesaid case, charge sheet has already been laid. However, the petitioner apprehends that as one of the offence under which charge sheet has been laid under Section 13(1) of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021, which is exclusively triable by the Court of the learned Sessions. Hence, the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate may not grant bail to the petitioner in the light of the observations made by the Apex Court in the case of “Prahlad Singh Bhati Vs. N.C.T., Delhi & Anr.” reported in “(2021) 4 SCC 280,” wherein the Apex Court has observed that even though there is no legal bar for the Magistrate to consider an application for grant of bail to a person who is arrested for an offence exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions yet it would be proper and appropriate that in such case the Magistrate directs the accused person to approach the Court of Sessions for the purpose of getting the relief of bail. 4. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for both sides and perused the case record. 5. The observations of the Apex Court in the above referred case of Prahlad Singh (supra) was made in a case which involved offence under Page No.# 3/4 Sections 302/406/498A of IPC, therefore, the same has to be applied only in cases of those nature in context of which the said observations was made. It is also important to note that in an offence under Section 302 of IPC, there was also an embargo under Section 437(1)(i) of the Cr.P.C., 1973 in granting bail in offences which entails punishment of life imprisonment or death penalty. The observations made by the Apex Court in the case of Prahlad Singh (supra) should not be read out of context in which it was made. 6. However, in the instant case, the offence involved is under Section 13(1) of Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021, which, though, an offence exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, however, the maximum punishment prescribed for the said offence is 8 (Eight) years only and no embargo is there on the Court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dhubri to consider an application for granting bail if it thinks fit to do so under the facts and circumstances of a particular case. 7. This Court is, therefore, of the considered opinion that the apprehension that the Court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dhubri, may not grant bail to the petitioner after he appears before the said Court in pursuant to the notices received by him, does not have any legal basis. 8. This Anticipatory Bail application is accordingly disposed of with an observation that the petitioner may appear before the Trial Court on the next date fixed i.e. 09.10.2025 and may pray for regular bail before the said Court, if so advised. Page No.# 4/4 JUDGE Comparing Assistant