Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 15288 (GAU)

MD. SADDAM HUSSAIN v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

Bail Appln./2147/2025 · 2025-06-26

Susmita Phukan Khaund

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010144652025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2147/2025 MD. SADDAM HUSSAIN S/O- NURUL AMIN, R/O- VILL.-MOHGHULI, P.S.-NORTH LAKHIMPUR, DIST.-LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : B DUTTA, A B T HAQUE Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER 27.06.2025 1. Heard learned counsel Mr. A. B. T. Haque for the petitioner Saddam Hussain who has filed his application under section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 with prayer for bail as the petitioner is behind bars since 21.05.2025 in connection with Lakhimpur P.S. Case No. 179/2025 under Sections 61(2)/316(2)/318(4) of the Page No.# 2/3 BNS and subsequently transferred as Howly P.S. Case No. 75/2025 under Sections 61(2)/316(2)/318(4) of the BNS numbered as GR Case No. 644/2025. 2. Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. P. Borthakur for the respondent State. 3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised serious objection stating that the petitioner along with the co-accused are history sheeters and they are involved in offence of smuggling fake gold. 4. The allegation against the petitioner is that he is deeply involved in inducing the informant to come to Assam from Rajasthan to buy fake gold. The prime- accused called the informant and initially showed him real gold and thereafter the informant came from Rajasthan. Then, he along with the co-accused robbed Rs. 10 lacs from the informant. 5. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner's wife gave birth to a child yesterday night and the petitioner's wife has no one to take care of her and the petitioner has to attend to his wife. 6. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner will abide by any stringent bail conditions if imposed upon him. 7. I have considered the length of detention. I have also considered the plight of the petitioner's wife. It appears that bail may be granted to the petitioner. 8. Considering all aspects, the petitioner is enlarged on bail of Rs. 30,000/- with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Elaka Magistrate under the conditions that: (i) The petitioner shall refrain from such activities with which he is alleged, Page No.# 3/3 (ii) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every fortnight till completion of investigation, and (iii) The petitioner shall not jump the bail and try to influence the witnesses. 9. On breach of any of the bail conditions, the Jurisdictional Court/Elaka Magistrate is at liberty to cancel the bail granted to the petitioner. 10. This application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant