Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010186642025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2713/2025 SAHIDUL ISLAM AND 2 ORS S/O MD. SADEK ALI, R/O NO. 1 LARKUCHI, P.S. MUKALMUA, DIST. NALBARI, ASSAM. 2: TAL ISLAM SHEIKH S/O LATE RAHMAN SHEIKH R/O CHAMOTA P.S. SONAPUR DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSAM. 3: MONSOOR ALI S/O LATE MD. SAHID ALI R/O KAPALKATA P.S SONAPUR DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P K DAS, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE Page No.# 2/3 HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 10.09.2025 Heard Mr. P.K. Das, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. This application has been filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for granting bail to the accused petitioners, namely 1. Sahidul Islam, 2. Tal Islam Sheikh and 3. Md. Monsoor Ali, in respect of Sonapur P.S. Case No. 121/2025 under Sections 303(2)/329(4)/317(2)/3(5) of BNS, 2023. Case diary is received. Perused the same. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that they have not committed any such offence as alleged in the FIR. He also submits that the accused petitioners are behind the bar since 40 days and hence, considering their length of detention, they may be released on bail. It is further submitted that all the stolen sewing machine have been returned and recovered and hence further custodial detention may not be required for further investigation of the case. However, they are ready and willing to extend their cooperation in the further investigation of the case, if they are granted with the privilege with the bail. Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that in this regard that the accused petitioner No.1 was the tempo driver, from where all the stolen sewing machines have been recovered and the petitioner No. 3 is the tempo owner and the petitioner No.2 is the worker of the then petitioner No.3, where all the sewing machines were about to sold by the accused petitioner No.1. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has further submitted that one more person was present in the tempo and he is yet to be apprehended by the I/O. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that it is not a fit case to grant bail to the petitioners. I have heard the submission made by the learned counsel for both sides and also perused the case diary and it is seen that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioners. However, considering the length of detention undergone by the petitioners and the recovery of the sewing machines, I find that further custodial detention may not be necessary for the purpose of investigation. Page No.# 3/3 Accordingly, I find it a fit case to extend the privilege of bail to the present petitioners. Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand) only each with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction learned Chief Judicial Magisrate, Kamrup(M), the accused petitioners named above be engaged on bail subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the petitioners shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii) that the petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. (iii) That the petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned CJM, Kamrup(M) without prior permission. In terms of the above, the bail application stands disposed of. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant