Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 26879 (GAU)

AJIT DAS v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

Bail Appln./3614/2025 · 2025-11-20

Sanjeev Kumar Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010247032025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3614/2025 AJIT DAS S/O LT. RAJU DAS, R/O HANPUR, P.S. NALBARI, DIST. NALBARI, ASSAM, TEMPORARY ADDRESS R/O 2 NO. RAILWAY GATE, P.S. PANBAZAR, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S M ABDULLAH P, MD IMRAN,MD R ISLAM,MS F HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 21.11.2025 Heard Mr. S.M. Abdullah P, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor. 2. By this petition under Section 483 BNSS, the accused-petitioner, namely, Ajit Das, who was arrested on 24.10.2025 in connection with Panbazar PS Page No.# 2/2 Case No. 317/2025 under Section 303(2)/317(2)/3(5) of BNSS is seeking bail. 3. As per the FIR one mobile phone belonging to the informant was stolen by the some unknown identified person, but on the basis of investigation one Sabur Ali was apprehended and on the basis of his statement the present petitioner was arrested. It further appears that the petitioner again sold the said mobile phone to some other person and ultimately the same was recovered from the possession of the said person, i.e., Ariful Islam. 4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is not involved in the theft but purchased the stolen property. 5. Having regard to the period of detention and progress of the investigation as well as the fact that the stolen items have been recovered, further detention of the petitioner is not necessary. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is allowed. 6. It is provided that the accused petitioner, named above, shall be released on bail of Rs.50,000/- with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Kamrup(M) in connection with the aforesaid case. 7. It is further provided that the petitioner shall regularly appear at the trial and shall not try to influence or intimidate the witnesses. 8. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant