Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9528 (GAU)

JALAL MONDAL v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

Bail Appln./843/2025 · 2025-03-26

Susmita Phukan Khaund

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010060232025 2025:GAU-AS:3595 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./843/2025 JALAL MONDAL S/O LATE KASHEM MONDAL. VILLAGE- CHIRAKUTA PT- II, P.S.- CHAPAR, DISTRICT - DUBRI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S K CHHETRY, MS. A AKHTAR,MR. M ISLAM,MR. N UDDIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER 27.03.2025 1. Heard learned counsel Mr. N. Uddin for the petitioner Jalal Mondal. 2. The petitioner has filed this application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 with prayer for bail as he is behind bars since 05.03.2025 in connection with Bongaigaon Police Station Case No. 296/2024 under Sections 61(2) Page No.# 2/3 (a)/336(3)/316(2)/340(2)/316(4)/342(1) of the BNS. 3. Heard Mr. K. Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the respondent State. 4. An FIR was lodged by the D.T.O. at Bongaigaon relating to gross irregularities by Babulal Narzary which resulted in registration of several vehicles from Lakshadweep. Several documents were manipulated for such illegal registrations. 5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised objection stating that there are incriminating materials in the Case Diary against the petitioner. 6. The petitioner operates in a network of members who have indulged in fraudulent activities of procuring false documents, manipulation and forgery of documents and thereby, this network consists of members who are not even employees of the office or financial institutions lending loans for obtaining vehicles. 7. I have also scrutinized the Case Diary. Indeed there are incriminating materials in the Case Diary against the petitioner. 8. I have considered the length of detention. Investigation has progressed substantially. It appears that further custodial detention may not be required for the progress of investigation. 9. Considering all aspects, petition is allowed. The petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 30,000/- with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Bongaigaon, under the conditions that: (i) The petitioner shall appear before the Page No.# 3/3 Investigating Officer on every fortnight till completion of investigation, (ii) The petitioner shall refrain from such activities with which he is alleged, and (iii) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission. 10. On breach of any of the bail conditions, the Jurisdictional Court/Elaka Magistrate is at liberty to immediately cancel the bail granted to the petitioner. 11. In terms of the above observation, this bail application stands disposed of. 12. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant