Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010047442026 2026:GAU-AS:3636 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./660/2026 SAIFUDDIN AHMED S/O ABDUL KADER, R/O DABORNI, P.S. HAJO DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM THROUGH THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R A CHOUDHURY, MR. SAYED SALIM AHMED,M. HOSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 12-03-2026 Heard Mr. HRA Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. M. Hossain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B.Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State respondent. 2. This is an application under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of bail to the accused/petitioner, namely, Saifuddin Ahmed who was arrested in connection Page No.# 2/3 with Hajo P.S. Case No. 33/2026 registered under Sections 305/331(4) of BNS, 2023. 3. Case diary received. Perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel that the present petitioner is innocent and he has committed any such offence as alleged in the FIR. However, from the seizure list, it is seen that some items have already been recovered from the possession of the petitioner from his own house and being a jewelry shop owner, availability of jewelry in his house cannot be denied. However, from the earlier rejection order passed by this Court, it is also observed by this Court that there are some differences in the articles seized from the present petitioner and the description of the articles made in the FIR. 5. He further submitted that if the articles which were seized by police is compared with the articles described in the FIR, it seems that there are differences in the items which were described in the FIR and the seizure memo. 6. Mr. Choudhury further submitted that the petitioner is in custody since last 47 days and hence, considering his period of detention also he may be released on bail. 7. Mr. Sarma, learned APP submitted in this regard that in the earlier bail application also it was observed and from the materials available in the case diary also it is seen that all the stolen items were sold to the present petitioner and it is not the present case, wherein, he received the stolen property but earlier on many occasions also, the petitioner used to receive the stolen property as revealed from the case diary and for which Section 317(4) BNS has already been added in the present case. 8. Mr. Sarma accordingly raised vehement objection and submitted that only considering the length of detention, the petitioner may not be released on bail at this stage. 9. After hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and Page No.# 3/3 considering the materials in the case diary wherefrom it reveals that the petitioner is a habitual receiver of the stolen property and for which Section 317(4) BNS, is also added against him during the investigation on the prayer made by the I.O. 10. Considering the conduct of the petitioner and the gravity of the offence, I do not find it a fit case to grant the petitioner the privilege of bail only considering the length of detention. 11. Accordingly, this bail application of the petitioner, namely, Saifuddin Ahmed in connection with Hajo P.S. Case No. 33/2026 registered under Sections 305/331(4) of BNS, 2023 stands rejected. 12. This bail application accordingly stands disposed of. 13. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant