Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 2670 (GAU)

SRI JEETENDRA AICH v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

Bail Appln./4004/2025 · 2026-01-18

Sanjeev Kumar Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010274372025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./4004/2025 SRI JEETENDRA AICH S/O - LATE JADAV CH. AICH R/O- NAGENDRA NAGAR, WARD NO. 1, P.O. P.S. - HOJAI, DISTRICT - HOJAI ASSAM, PIN 782435 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D P BORAH, MR B PAUL Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 19.01.2026 Heard Mr. D.P. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Addl. P.P for the State. 2. By this petition under Section 483 BNSS, the accused-petitioners, namely, Sri Jeetendra Aich who was arrested on 03.12.2025 in connection with Basistha P.S. Case No. 562/2025 under Section 318(4) of BNSS is seeking Page No.# 2/4 bail. 3. The allegation as per the FIR is that one Smt. Bina Hazarika, wife of Sri Niren Hazarika, a resident of Third Floor, E-Block, Disang Apartment, lodged a written complaint before the Officer-in-charge if Basistha Police Station on 05.11.2025 inter-alia stating that the day before lodging of the F.I.R. at about 1 O'clock of the forenoon, a stranger charmer came to her house and assured to safeguard the future of her family by giving shield and by convincing her that the gold ornaments would be required to be purified for this purpose and thereby the said person left her house with gold jewelry amounting to Rs. 7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs) only approximately. The informant further gave one phone number of that person in the complaint which according to her was showing switched off. The informant gave the details of the jewelry in the F.I.R. such as 1 (one) gold necklace with locket, 1 (one) pair of gold earrings, 4 (four) nos. of gold rings, 2 (two) nos. of silver rings and 1 (one) pair of silver payal. On receipt of the said complaint, the officer-in-charge of Basistha Police Station made a General Diary entry vide Basistha P.S. G.D.E. no. 44 dated 06.11.2025 and entrusted SI (P) Prince Maio to cause an enquiry and submit report. SI (P) Prince Maio conducted an investigation with reference to Basistha P.S. G.D.E. No. 44 dated 06.11.2025 and lodged a written complaint before the Officer-in-charge, Basistha Police Station inter alia stating that he physically visited the place of occurrence and examined the complainant as well as available witnesses and during the course of investigation it came to light that the so called spiritual charmer had visited the complainant's residence and fraudulently cheated them thereby stealing gold ornaments amounting to RS. 7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs) only approximate. The said gold ornaments Page No.# 3/4 include 1 (one) gold necklace, 1 (one) pair of gold nose rings, 4 (four) nos. of gold rings, 2 (two) nos. of silver rings and 1 (one) pair of silver payal with a silver chain. SI (P) Prince Maio further stated that during investigation he tried to contact the mobile number of the accused person i.e.8135980199 but the same was found to be switched off and he collected and analyzed Call Details Record (CDR) of the said number and found that the accused is a part oforganized gang involved in similar offences. 4. The I.O. has arrested the main accused Shahidul Ali, who led the police to the jewellery shop of the petitioner where some of the articles were recovered. 5. It is conceded by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner being the owner of the jewellery shop and had infact purchased the said stolen articles below the market price from the main accused and the only submission is that having regard to the length of detention of 48 days, the prayer for bail may considered. 6. Having regard to the fact that the investigation has progressed as for as the present petitioner is concerned and articles have also been recovered, considering the length of detention of 48 days , the prayer for bail is allowed. 7. Accordingly, it is provided that the petitioner, named above, shall be released on bail of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Kamrup(M), Guwahati in connection with the aforesaid case:- 8. It is further provided that the petitioner shall not try to tamper with the evidence or influence with the witnesses. 9. Return the case diary. Page No.# 4/4 10. The bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant