Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010095502026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1287/2026 MD JOYNAL ABEDIN AND 2 ORS. S/O LT. IJJAT ALI R/O SALMARA P.S. KAMPUR, NAGAON 2: TOKRIM HUSSAIN @ TOKRIB HUSSAIN S/O MD. JOYNAL ABEDIN R/O SALMARA P.S. KAMPUR NAGAON. 3: TOUSIF HUSSAIN S/O MD. JOYNAL ABEDIN R/O SALMARA P.S.KAMPUR NAGAO VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M H AHMED, R ALI,I AMIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER 19.05.2026 1. Heard Mr. M. H. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners namely, (i) Joynal Abedin, (ii) Tokrim Hussain, and (iii) Tousif Hussain, who have filed this application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 with prayer for bail as they are behind bars since 25.04.2026 in connection with Kampur Police Station Case No. 45/2026 under Sections 126(2)/132/303(2)/3(5) of the BNS read with Section 135 of the Electricity Act. 2. Heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State who has raised serious objection stating that the business enclosures attached to the petitioners house have been using domestic power supply for business purposes. The petitioners bail petition cannot be considered without the perusal of the Case Diary. The petitioners have been involved in theft of electricity and they were aggressive by nature as they tried to attack the officials of the APDCL, Kampur. 3. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the trade license marked as Annexure-5 was issued on 24.04.2026 and they were about to start their business. They were not running business at the time of the incident and they were not involved in theft of electricity for domestic purposes and converting utilities into industrial purposes. 4. I have considered the submissions at the Bar with circumspection. 5. The petitioners have been behind bars since 25.04.2026. Presumably, Page No.# 3/4 investigation may have progressed to a certain extent. 6. It appears that custodial detention may not be required for the progress of investigation. The petitioners are local residents and they are not flight risks. The petitioners are willing to co-operate with the remaining part of the investigation and to abide by any stringent bail conditions if imposed upon them. 7. Considering all aspects, petition is allowed. The petitioners shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/- each (Rupees Thirty Thousand) with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Jurisdictional Court/Elaka Magistrate under the conditions that: (i) The petitioners shall refrain from such activities with which they are alleged, (ii) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every fortnight till completion of investigation, and (iii) The petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission. 8. On breach of any of the bail conditions, the Court is at liberty to cancel the bail granted to the petitioners. 9. In terms of the above observation, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Page No.# 4/4 Comparing Assistant