Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 25617 (GAU)

JATINDRA DAS AND ANR. v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

AB/2068/2025 · 2025-11-30

Pranjal Das

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010192482025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2068/2025 JATINDRA DAS AND ANR. SON OF LATE BASANTA DAS VILL- KARCHUWABORI (SHIMALTOLA) P.S. JAGIROAD, DIST.MORIGAON, ASSAM, PIN-782411 2: ABU BAKKAR @ ABU BAKKAR SIDDIQUE S/O LATE KHUSED ALI VILL- SHUKTIPUTA HABI P.S. JAGIROAD DIST. MORIGAON ASSAM PIN-78241 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M K HUSSAIN, MR. M ALOM,MS. F H AHMED,MRS. S Y AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER 01-12-2025 Heard Mr. M. K. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. This application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioners, namely, 1. Jatindra Das and 2. Abu Bakkar @ Abu Bakkar Siddique, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Jagiroad P. S. Case No. 204 / 2025 under Sections 318(4) / 316(2) / 115(2) / 351(2) /3(5) of BNS. The gist of accusation in this case is that one Abdul Jalil had lodged a complaint before the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Morigaon against the present petitioners, inter alia, alleging that the petitioner No. 2 took an amount of Rs.3,85,000/- from the complainant for investing the same in Haria Dablong Meen Mahal. However, it is alleged that thereafter the petitioners refused to return the said money and they have misappropriated the money of the complainant. The said complaint petition was forwarded to the Officer- incharge of Jagiroad Police Station by the Court for registration of the FIR and investigation and accordingly Jagiroad P.S. Case No. 204/2025 has been registered. The petitioners were granted interim pre-arrest bail on 29.08.2025. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant thereof, they appeared before the IO and their statements have been recorded. The prosecution submits that in the meantime, upon completion of investigation the case has been charge-sheeted. Page No.# 3/3 In the given facts and circumstances, the interim bail granted vide order dated 29.08.2025 is hereby made absolute with the following conditions: (i) That the accused persons shall be available for the trial. (ii) That the accused persons shall not hamper or tamper with evidence. (iii) They shall cooperate with the remaining investigation as and when required. Violation of bail conditions will entail cancellation of the bail. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant