Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010163782026 2026:GAU-AS:11663 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2211/2026 AFTABUR RAHMAN CHOUDHURY S/O SAMSUL HOQUE CHOUDHURY VILLAGE- KHUDPURAHURIA, P.S. SRIBHUMI, DIST. SRIBHUMI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R CHOUDHURY, Z HUSSAIN,MS G TALUKDAR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 17.08.2026 Heard Mr. H. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the accused and Mr. P. Barthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This application, under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, is preferred by the Page No.# 2/4 accused, namely, Aftabur Rahman Choudhury, who has been languishing in jail hajot since 18.07.2026, in connection with Sribhumi P.S. Case No. 165/2026, registered under Sections 303(2)/317(2)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023, read with Section 13(1) of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021, pending before the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Sribhumi, for grant of bail. 3. It is to be noted here that the aforementioned case has been registered on the basis of one FIR lodged by one UBC, Bishal Chutia, of Sribhumi Police Station, on 18.07.2026. The essence of allegation against the accused in the FIR dated 18.07.2026, is that on 17.07.2026, at about 4 PM, he was found in possession of 7 (seven) numbers of cattle, along with one Rehan Uddin, Abdul Sabur and Abdul Monnan. On being asked, they failed to produce any valid documents, relating to the ownership, purchase, transportation or lawful possession of the cattle and also failed to provide any satisfactory explanation regarding the source and destination of the said cattle. 4. Mr. Choudhury, learned counsel for the accused submits that the accused is found in possession of only one cow and the said cow was purchased by him vide ‘Annexure-3’ of the petition, and that the accused is behind the bars for last 30 days and he is ready to cooperate with the investigating agency and is also ready to face the trial and therefore, he has contended to allow this petition. 5. Per contra, Mr. Barthakur, learned APP for the State respondent, by producing the case diary before this Court, submits that at the time of arrest, the accused failed to produce any document regarding possession of the cow. However, Mr. Barthakur submits that the Investigating Officer has achieved significant progress in the investigation of the case. Page No.# 3/4 6. Having heard the submission of the learned counsel for both the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and also gone through the case diary with the assistance of Mr. Barthakur, learned APP for the State respondent. 7. It appears that the I.O. has collected some materials in support of the allegations made in the FIR. However, it also appears that the I.O. has achieved substantial progress in investigation of the case and the accused is behind the bars for the last 30 days. Moreover, the accused has produced one document, being ‘Annexure-3’ of the petition; in support of his claim of possession of the cow. 8. Under the given facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that further custodial detention of the accused seems to be unwarranted, herein this case. And accordingly, this Court is inclined to allow this petition. 9. It is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Sribhumi, the accused shall be enlarged on bail. 10. Case diary be returned. 11. In terms of the above, this Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Page No.# 4/4 Comparing Assistant