Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010220522026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3100/2026 INSAR ALI S/O ACHMAT ALI,R/O VILLAGE - KORAITOLA MUSLIMPARA,P.S FAKIRAGRAM,DISTRICT KOKRAJHAR, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S M ABDULLAH P, MD IMRAN,MR. S RAHMAN,MS F HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 05.10.2026 Heard Mr. S.M. Abdullah P., learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the accused-applicant. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Addl. P.P., representing the State respondent. 2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, praying for Page No.# 2/3 granting bail to the accused-applicant in connection with Fakiragram Police Station Case No. 42/2026, registered under Sections 303(2)/3(5) of BNS, 2023, read with Sections 13(1)/16 of Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021, read with Section 11(1) (a) of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. 3. The brief facts of the case is that on 22.09.2026, one Manjit Kumar Nath, Sub- Inspector, Chithila P.P. lodged an FIR with the Officer-in-Charge, Fakiragram Police Station, alleging that on 22.09.2026 at about 12:15 PM, on the basis of some confidential information that some miscreants are carrying cattle from one place and transporting the same, the police intercepted the vehicle and apprehended the persons therein. It is alleged that one male cattle was being transported. Since the persons in the vehicle could not produce valid documents, the cattle as well as the vehicle were seized and the persons were arrested. 4. On the basis of the FIR, police registered Fakiragram P.S. Case No. 42/2026, under the aforesaid sections. 5. The accused-applicant was arrested on 25.09.2026 in connection with the aforesaid case and he has been behind bars since then. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the accused-applicant submits that the accused-applicant has been arrested on suspicion that he had agreed to purchase the cattle which was being transported. He submits that the accused-applicant had no knowledge that the cattle was stolen and that the cattle was seized, and there is no agreement or consent to buy the cattle from the accused persons. In view of the above, he submits that the accused-applicant should be allowed to go on bail, since the cattle as well as the vehicle have already been seized and his continued detention is no longer required for the investigation. Page No.# 3/3 7. On the other hand, Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, opposes the prayer for bail. 8. Taking into account the facts of the case and since the cattle along with the vehicle have already been seized by the police, this Court is of the opinion that the accused-applicant should be granted bail. Accordingly, it is directed that the accused-applicant shall be released on bail in connection with the aforesaid case on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kokrajhar, subject to the conditions that the accused-applicant shall co-operate with the investigation as and when called upon by the Investigating Officer, and shall not tamper with evidence. 9. In terms of the above directions, this bail application is disposed of. JUDGE Miriam Degu (SPA)