Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010280332024 2025:GAU-AS:336 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./13/2025 MOHIDUL ISLAM AND 2 ORS S/O MD. JINAR ALI R/O MAYER CHAR PT. VII, P.O. NAYER ALGA P.S. BILASIPARA, IN THE DISTRICT OF DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN-783348 2: KAJIM UDDIN PRADHANI @ KAJIMUDDIN PRADHANI S/O JALIL HAQUE PRADHANI R/O HATSINGIMARI DAFADAR PARA P.S. HATSINGIMARI MANCACHAR SOUTH SALMARA ASSAM 3: SAHIDUL BHUYAN @ SAHIDUL ISLAM BHUYAN S/O HABEJUDDIN R/O VILL- BALESHWAR P.O. NAYER ALGA P.S. BILASIPARA IN THE DISTRICT OF DHUBRI ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N H MAZARBHUIYAN, MR R I BHUYAN,MR. M H SAIKIA,MR. M R SODIAL Page No.# 2/3 Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 09-01-2025 Heard learned counsel Mr. M.H. Saikia for the petitioner Nos. 1. Mohidul Islam, 2. Kajim Uddin Pradhani @ Kajimuddin Pradhani and 3. Sahidul Bhuyan @ Sahidul Islam, who have filed this application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with prayer for bail as they are behind bars since 23.10.2024 & 25.10.2024 in connection with Dispur Police Station Case No. 1080/2024 under Section 310(2)/311 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the respondent State. 3. The allegation against the petitioners is that they have committed dacoity from the informant’s house robbing him of gold ornaments of Rs.5 Lacs and cash of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand). It is also alleged that the petitioners broke into the informant’s house by removing the window and grill. 4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that nothing has been recovered from the petitioners except one screw driver as the petitioner is a driver of a ‘Rapido’. It is further submitted that the petitioners have been behind bars for 78 (Seventy Eight) days and further custodial detention may not be required for the progress of investigation. 5. I have scrutinized the Case Diary. Page No.# 3/3 6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. B. Sarma for the respondent State has raised objection stating that the petitioners are not entitled to bail as they are habitual offenders and as there is every possibility that they will again commit the same offence if they are enlarged on bail. 7. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they are willing to abide by any stringent bail conditions, if imposed upon them. Petitioners are local residents and they are not flight risks. 8. Considering the submissions and considering all aspects, the petitioners are enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) each with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M) under the conditions that : (i) petitioners shall refrain from such activities with which they are alleged, (ii) petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every fortnight till completion of investigation, (iii) petitioners shall cooperate with the remaining part of investigation and not to tamper with the evidence. 9. On breach of any of the bail conditions, learned jurisdictional Court/Eleka Magistrate is at liberty to immediately cancel the bail granted to the petitioners. 10. In terms of the above observation, this Bail Application stands disposed of. 11. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant