Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010269372025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2881/2025 MAYNAL HOQUE S/O KASIM UDDIN,R/O SATRA KANARA, P.S. BAGBAR,DISTRICT BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN 781308 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. T SOM, MS. A MAHANTA,MS. U HAZARIKA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER Date : 10-12-2025 Heard Ms. T. Som, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K Parasar, learned Addl. P.P appearing for the State. As per the FIR lodged on 10.11.2025 at about 7:50 P.M, information was received by the Police that a truck of which registration was not known had knocked down one person near Kalitakuchi. On verification, the driver of the Page No.# 2/3 truck and his associates were found absent from the vehicle. The vehicle was loaded with 7 buffaloes and it is also stated in the FIR that the said victim of the road traffic accident had met his demise due to the injuries sustained in the accident. Ms. T. Som, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner herein is the owner of the vehicle and he is in no way connected with the offence alleged in the FIR. She has further submitted that a case has been registered under section 281/125(b)/303(2) BNS r/w section 125 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules & Section 11(1) (d) Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. The petitioner cannot in any case be held to be involved in the non-bailable offence amongst the aforesaid sections. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has already been granted the zimma of the vehicle and also zimma of the livestock has been given to its original owner. She therefore prays that since there is an apprehension that he may be arrested when he approached the authority to take the zimma of the vehicle involved, the petitioner may be granted the privilege of pre-arrest bail in the matter. The learned Addl. P.P appearing for the State has objected to the bail petition. We have heard the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and we have gone through the record available. We have found that the provisions of law quoted in the FIR are bailable and save and accept, Section 303(2) of BNS. Since there is no allegation that the petitioner was driving the truck at the time of accident, we do not find that the said provision is applicable to his case. This Court deems it fit and proper to grant the pre- arrest bail to the petitioner, namely Maynal Hoque, who, in case of arrest, shall be allowed to go on bail by executing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Page No.# 3/3 Thousand) only with one surety of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, in relation to Hajo P. S Case No. 475/2025 with following conditions; i) That the petitioner shall appear before the I.O within a period 7(seven) days from the date of passing this order ii) That the petitioner shall not hamper or tamper with evidence. Accordingly, this Anticipatory bail application stands disposed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant