Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 19429 (GAU)

MOINUL ISLAM ALIAS MOINAL ISLAM v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

AB/2293/2025 · 2025-09-17

Sanjeev Kumar Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010211132025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2293/2025 MOINUL ISLAM ALIAS MOINAL ISLAM S/O ROFIKUL ISLAM VILL- NO. 2 ADAVETI, P.O. TEWARIPAL,. P.S. SOOTEA DIST. BISWANTH, ASSAM, PIN-784175 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S MUKTAR, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 18.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. S Muktar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. This is an application under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner Moinul Islam @ Moinal Islam in Page No.# 2/3 connection with Sootea P.S. Case No. 46/2025 under Sections 318(4)/317(4)/316(2)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and G.R No. 241/2025. 3. The allegations as per the FIR, briefly put, is that one Md. Chah Jamal @ Md. Shah Jamal took a vehicle from the complainant on higher purchase. Failing to pay the installments, he handed over the same to a 3rd person by executing a notarized agreement dated 19.09.2024. Subsequently, the 3rd party failed to pay the installments because of which the petitioner also lodged an FIR against him. However, subsequently, the vehicle has been recovered and the process of handing it over to the complainant is underway. In the meantime, the petitioner has already spent 46 (forty-six) days in custody. 4. It is submitted with reference to the agreement dated 19.09.2024 that the present petitioner seeking pre-arrest bail was merely a witness to the said agreement. A perusal of the said agreement would lend support to the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner in as much as the name of the petitioner appears merely as the second witness to the agreement. 5. Considering the above, the prayer for pre-arrest bail is granted on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with 2(two) sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority under the following conditions : (i) The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and appear before the I/O within 7(seven) days from the date of this order. (ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses connected with the case. Page No.# 3/3 (iii) The petitioner shall not leave his place of residence without the permission of the arresting authority. 7. In view of the above, the petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant