JUVAIDUR RAHMAN @ JUNAIDUL ISLAM v. THE STATE OF ASSAM
AB/552/2025 · 2025-05-04
Mitali Thakuria
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 8793 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 8793 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010048722025
2025:GAU-AS:5533
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/552/2025 JUVAIDUR RAHMAN @ JUNAIDUL ISLAM S/O SARAFAT ALI VILL-BARBHETI P.S. DHING DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR F HAQUE, MR A ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 05-05-2025
Heard Mr. F. Haque, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of
Page No.# 2/2 State respondent.
2. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 for granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, namely, Juvaidur Rahman @ Junaidul Islam in connection with Dhing P.S. Case No. 56/2025 under Sections 64/296/351(3)/3(5) of BNS, R/W Section 67 of I.T. Act.
3. Case Diary received. Perused the same.
4. It is submitted by Mr. Haque, the learned counsel for the petitioner that the present accused/petitioner is innocent and he is no way connected with the allegation. More so, there is no allegation brought against him in the FIR also. However, after obtaining the order of interim pre-arrest bail, he appeared before the I/O and cooperated with the investigation.
5. Mr. Baruah, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted in this regard that the petitioner is extending his cooperation in connection with the case and considering the materials in the Case Diary his prayer may be considered.
6. Hearing the submissions made by the learned counsels for both sides, the materials in the Case Diary and conduct of the present petitioner, I find that custodial interrogation may not be necessary at this stage for the purpose of investigation. Accordingly, the interim order dated 07.03.2025 is hereby made absolute with the same terms and conditions. JUDGE Comparing Assistant