Gauhati High Court
Abdul Sahid vs The State Of Assam on 5 August, 2024
Author: Malasri Nandi
Bench: Malasri Nandi
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010138672024
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/1796/2024
ABDUL SAHID
S/O MOHAMMAD ABDUL RASID, R/O PIRU LINE ROAD GAON, LEDO, P.S.-
MARGHERITA, DIST- TINSUKIA, ASSAM-786182
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R SALOI, MS. B SOREN,MR P DOLEY,MS M
ZOMUANPUII,MR J SINGH,MR H AGARWAL
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI
ORDER
Date : 05.08.2024 Heard Ms. S. Bhuyan, learned counsel appears on behalf of Mr. H. Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.
By this petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Page No.# 2/3 Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioner, namely, Abdul Sahid, has prayed for granting pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Margherita P.S. Case No. 75/2024 under Section 379 IPC r/w Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the name of the petitioner is not mentioned in the FIR. But it is admitted that the petitioner is owner of two excavators vehicle which were seized in connection with this case. It is also submitted that in the FIR, there is no mention of any article or coal has been removed or stolen for which Section 379 IPC is not attracted in this case. It is further submitted that Section 3 of PDPP Act is also not attracted in this case as there is no mention of any public property being damaged in the case. Considering the background of the case, the previlege of pre-arrest may be extended to the petitioner.
Mr. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has produced the case dairy and submitted that the petitioner is the mastermind of illegal coal mining. However, the petitioner may appear before the investigating officer along with relevant documents for interrogation.
I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. I have also perused the case diary.
Considering the facts as well as the documents available in the case diary, the petitioner above-named is granted the interim protection till the next date fixed.
Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, named above, in connection with Margherita P.S. Case No. 75/2024 under Section 379 IPC r/w Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, he shall be released on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with a suitable surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the arresting authority.
Page No.# 3/3 The direction for pre-arrest bail is subject to the conditions that the petitioner:
(a) shall appear before the Investigating Police Officer within ten days from today and shall co-operate with the investigation;
(b) shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.
List on 28.08.2024 for production of up-to-date case diary along with the statement of the petitioner.
Send back the case diary.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant