Gauhati High Court
Azahar Uddin @ Ajahar Ali And 4 Ors vs The State Of Assam on 27 July, 2020
Author: Manish Choudhury
Bench: Manish Choudhury
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010082742020
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
AB 1428/2020
1:AZAHAR UDDIN @ AJAHAR ALI AND 4 ORS.
S/O-HANIF ALI
R/O. VILL- SUKMANAH
PO-SUKMANAH
PS- BARPETA
DIST-BARPETA
ASSAM
2: AMINUL HOQUE @ AMINUL ISLAM
S/O- HANIF ALI
R/O- SUKMANAH
PO-SUKMANAH
PS AND DIST- BARPETA
ASSAM
3: SUROT JAMAL @ SURAT JAMAL
S/O- MATIYAR RAHMAN
VILL- KALJAHAR
PS- HOWLY
DIST- BARPETA
ASSAM
4: MAZIBUR RAHMAN
S/O- LT SALIM UDDIN
R/O. VILL-KALJAHAR
PS- HOWLY
DIST- BARPETA
ASSAM
5: MAHIDUL ISLAM @ ISMAIL HUSSAIN
S/O- AKBAR ALI
R/O. VILL- SUKMANA
PS-BARPETA
DIST- BARPETA
Page No.# 2/3
ASSAM
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP. BY PP ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R A CHOUDHURY
Advocate for the Respondent : PP
ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
ORDER
Date : 27-07-2020 Heard Mr. H.R.A. Choudhury, learned Senior counsel for the accused-petitioners and Mr. T.K. Mishra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, State of Assam. By this application under Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), the accused- petitioners viz. 1) Azahar Uddin @ Ajahar Ali, 2) Aminul Hoque @ Aminul Islam, 3) Surot Jamal @ Surat Jamal, 4) Mazibur Rahman and 5) Mahidul Islam @ Ismail Hussain have prayed for pre-arrest bail apprehending their arrest, in connection with Howly Police Station Case No. 126/2020, registered under Sections 147/148/188/269/270/353/332, Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The allegations in the First Information Report (FIR) are, inter-alia, to the effect that the accused-persons named in the FIR, were digging earth on 27.03.2020 with the use of poclain machine in disobedience of the instructions issued by the Government in respect of Covid-19 pandemic. Having received the information when a team of police personnel reached at the spot the accused-persons had fled away from the spot. Thereafter, the team of police personnel was attacked by the accused-persons with lathi, jharu, etc. As a result, some of the members of the police team sustained injuries.
The learned Senior counsel for the accused-petitioners has referred to an order dated 21.05.2020 passed in B.A. No. 1008/2020 (Hanif Ali vs. State of Assam) wherein it was recorded that the injuries received by the police personnel were simple in nature. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that he has received the concerned case diary. He has submitted that the accused-petitioners have been named in the FIR and pursuant to the interim order dated 16.06.2020, the accused-petitioners have appeared before the Investigating Officer (I.O.) of the case and after interrogation, their statements have been duly recorded.
The statements of the witnesses recorded by the I.O. are perused. It transpires that the Page No.# 3/3 people gathered at the place of incident had attacked the police personnel with lathi, jharu etc. and the injuries sustained by the members of the police team were simple in nature.
Upon due consideration of the nature and the gravity of the allegations; the facts that the injuries sustained were simple and the accused-petitioners have been cooperating with the investigation by joining the investigation, this Court is of the considered view that custodial detention of the accused-petitioners are not necessary for the purpose of further investigation of the case, provided they continue to extend their cooperation in the further investigation of the case and their releases on bail at this stage of investigation, are not likely to affect the further investigation of the case in any prejudicial manner.
Accordingly, the interim protection granted to the accused-petitioners by order dated 16.06.2020 is hereby made absolute, subject to the following conditions:
1) The accused-petitioners shall appear before the I.O. of the case as and when their presence are called for the investigation of the case and shall cooperate with the investigation;
2) The accused-petitioners shall not hamper with the investigation or tamper with the evidence of the case; and
3) The accused-petitioners 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.
The bail application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Return the case diary.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant