Gauhati High Court
Nur Mahammad @ Babar Ali vs The State Of Assam on 27 April, 2022
Author: Sanjay Kumar Medhi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Medhi
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010050972022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/761/2022
NUR MAHAMMAD @ BABAR ALI
SON OF JAHUR ALI
R/O VILL- MIRIKAMARI
P.S. BHURAGAON, DIST. MORIGAON, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR J C BORAH
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
ORDER
27.04.2022 Heard Shri JC Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner, who has filed this application under Section 438 CrPC seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Bhuragaon PS Case No. 18/2022 registered under Sections 406 / 420 IPC read with Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
2. Shri Borah, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations made against him in the FIR dated 15.02.2022 are highly exaggerated and the stock of rice found in the room is of 496.90 KGs (FCI Tag) and remaining 2566.90 KGs for his own consumption. He accordingly submits that no offence is made out and in any case, Section 7 of the Page No.# 2/2 Essential Commodities Act, 1955 is bailable in nature.
3. On the other hand, Shri BB Gogoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam submits that the quantity of rice recovered does not appear to be reasonable vis-à-vis the requirement of the family.
4. In his reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the additional affidavit with which the ration cards of his mother and his wife have been annexed. In support of the plea that other rice was purchased by him for business, Annexure 1 of the petition has been relied upon as a receipt by one M/S. AK Food Product for submission of rice of 128 Bags.
5. After hearing the parties and on perusal of the records, what appears is that the amount of rice recovered is a huge one amounting to 496.90 KGs in 10 nos. of Jute gunny Bags with FCI tag and 2566.90 KGs of rice in 53 nos. of Plastic Bags. Further, this Court is not in a position to examine the authenticity or otherwise of the receipt of one M/S. AK Food Product which can be done only by the learned Trial Court after adducing of evidence.
6. This Court is of the opinion that the projection made on behalf of the petitioner appears to be neither reasonable nor logical inasmuch as the total quantity hoarded would be more than 3000 KGs which includes 496.90 KGs FCI rice. The FCI rice, which is made for Public Distribution System cannot be hoarded in the manner.
7. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act is bailable in nature. It is however seen that along with the Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, Sections 406 / 420 IPC have also been invoked.
8. In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to accept the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same stands rejected.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant