Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Gauhati High Court

Mohammad Azharuddin And Anr vs The State Of Assam on 3 February, 2020

Author: Manish Choudhury

Bench: Manish Choudhury

                                                                                 Page No. 1/3

GAHC010009982020




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
                                Case No. : Bail Appln. 161/2020
            1:MOHAMMAD AZHARUDDIN AND ANR.
            S/O- ALI MOHAMMAD, R/O- VILL.- JEHNJHPURI, P.O. BARAULI, P.S.-
            KHATWADA, TEHSIL- KAMA, DIST- BHARATPUR, RAJASTHAN.

            2: AZAD KHAN
             S/O- LT. ATTU KHAN
             R/O- VILL. PAWSAR
             P.O. KOT
             P.S. BAHIN
            TEHSIL- HATHIN
             DIST.- PALWAL
             HARYANA
            VERSUS

            1:THE STATE OF ASSAM
            REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM.

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. G PHUKAN
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

                                     BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
                                           ORDER

Date : 03-02-2020 Heard Mr. G. Phukan, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. T. K. Mishra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

By is application under Section 439, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners viz. (1) Mohammad Azharuddin & (2) Azad Khan have prayed for their release on bail as they are in detention in connection with Paltanbazar P.S. Case No. 1359/2019, registered under Section 420/379/511, I.P.C.

Page No. 2/3

It is submitted by Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State that the case diary as called for, has not been received.

On the other hand, Mr. Phukan has submitted that the petitioners have been arrested merely on suspicion and there are no specific allegations against the petitioners as regards the commission of any offence. It is further submitted by him that the petitioners had come to Guwahati from Haryana to appear an interview and they are employees of a private company viz. CAN PACK Private Limited, Haryana where they are Sales Executives for the Company in the district of Palwal, Haryana. Their duties as such Sale Executive are opening of bank accounts of different banks for their customers within the jurisdiction of Haryana and after opening such bank accounts, such ATM Cards are provided to the respective customers. The ATM Cards found in his possession, he submits, are invalid ATM Cards.

I have perused the contents of the FIR and the forwarding report. The petitioners were apprehended on the ground that a large nos. of ATM Cards i.e. 56 nos. were recovered from their possession and such possession of a large nos. of ATM Cards are indicative of the fact that they had illegal intention to commit an offence.

Upon consideration of the facts that no specific commission of offence has been alleged against the petitioners and that the petitioners are in custody since 09.12.2019, I am of the prima facie view that in the event the petitioners are released on bail, the course of investigation will not be prejudicially effected, provided they continue to cooperation with the investigation of the case.

Accordingly, the petitioners are allowed to be enlarged on bail of Rs. 10,000/- each with one suitable surety each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M), subject to the following conditions :-

1. The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when their presences are called for and required for investigation and they shall co-operate with the investigation;
2. The 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 him from disclosing such facts either to the Court or to any police officer;
Page No. 3/3
3. The petitioners shall not hamper with the investigation, or tamper with the evidence of the case; and
4. The petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M) without permission of the said Court.

This application stands disposed of in the afore-mentioned terms.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant