Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010261222024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/3242/2024 RAZIP ALI S/O LATE HAFEZ ALI R/O VILL- TUKRAPARA PIN CODE- 781137 P.O. GOROIMARI P.S. CHAYGAON DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M P CHOUDHURY, MR. S BATHARI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 22.01.2025 Heard Mr. M.P. Choudhury, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. Apprehending arrest in connection with the Azara P.S. Case No. 232/2024, under Sections 316(3)/303(2) of the B.N.S., this application under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S., is preferred by applicant namely, Razip Ali for Page No.# 2/4 grant of pre-arrest bail. 3. It is to be noted here that the said case has been registered on the basis of one F.I.R., lodged by one Kamal Jain, on 11.11.2024. The essence of allegation made in the F.I.R. is that on 10.11.2024, at around 11:30 a.m., 1900 cartons of refine palm oil was carried in a Truck, bearing registration No. AS-01- FC-9190, from Azara B.G. Ward towards Jain Warehouse at Changsari and said Truck was driven by one Razip Ali. Thereafter, the vehicle was found at Bahar Darbar Bhandar in Changsari Checkgate with only 100 – 150 (approximately) cartons of palm oil and rest of cartons were stolen by the said driver. 4. Mr. Choudhury, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and no way involved with the offence alleged in the F.I.R. Mr. Choudhury further submits that while he was carrying the articles from Azara B.G. Ward towards Jain Warehouse at Changsari, on the way he received an information about the ailments of his brother, who was admitted at one Nisa Mukti Kendra; and therefore, he left the vehicle in front of the warehouse and proceed to see his brother. In support of his submission, Mr. Choudhury has also referred to some medical document enclosed with this petition. Mr. Choudhury also submits that he is ready to cooperate with the investigating agency and therefore, it is contended to allow the petition. 5. On the other hand, by producing the case diary before this Court, Mr. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the I.O. has collected sufficient incriminating materials against the applicant. Mr. Sarma further submits that the stolen articles are yet to be recovered and his custodial interrogation is necessary in the interest of investigation. Therefore, Mr. Sarma has contended to dismiss the petition. Page No.# 3/4 6. Having heard the submissions of learned Advocates of both sides, I have carefully gone through the petition as well as the documents placed on record and also perused the case diary produced before this court with the assistance of Mr. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 7. The case diary reveals that the I.O. has collected sufficient incriminating materials against the applicant. The ase diary further reveals that out of 1900 cartons of refine palm oil only 264 cartons were recovered from the Truck, bearing registration No. AS-01-FC-9190 and rest of cartons are yet to be recovered. 8. It is not in dispute that the applicant was the driver of the said Truck, who had taken the articles from Azara B.G. Ward to Jain Warehouse at Changsari. 9. Though Mr. Choudhury, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the brother of the applicant was in a Nisa Mukti Kendra, Mukalmua at Nalbari and also submits one medical document in support of the same, yet, the explanation so forthcoming is found to be not at all satisfactory. The case diary speaks otherwise. 10. In view of the materials so far collected in the case diary, this court is of the view that the custodial interrogation of the applicant is very much necessary to recover the stolen articles and if the applicant is released on pre- arrest bail, at this stage, there is a least chance of recovery of the same. 11. Under such circumstances, this court is of the view that this is not a fit case where the privilege of pre-arrest bail can be extended to the applicant at this stage and therefore, the same stands dismissed. Page No.# 4/4 12. The case diary be returned. JUDGE Comparing Assistant