High CourtsSingle Bench(2020) 09 GAU CK 0019

Khalilar Rahman And Anr vs State Of Assam

Gauhati High Court · Decided on 22 September 2020

HON’BLE JUDGES
Hitesh Kumar Sarma, J
RESULT
Disposed Off
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 1643 Of 2020 & Case No. : Bail Appln. 1643 Of 2020

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

15 paragraphs · 667 words

This is an application made under Section 439 Cr.P.C., seeking bail by the accused-petitioners, namely, 1) Khalilar Rahman, and 2) Motiur Rahman, in connection with

Panbazar Police Station Case No.400/2020 registered under Section 22(b) of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

Heard Mr. S. Munir, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. NJ Dutta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State Respondent.

Case diary produced has been perused. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the alleged contraband was not recovered from the possession of accused-petitioner Motiur Rahman and, rather as per the seizure list, the suspected contraband - heroin (22 grams) was recovered from the possession of accused-petitioner Khalilar Rahman. Learned counsel for the petitioner has taken me to the seizure list, at Page 20 of the petition. On perusal of the said seizure list, it is found that the investigating officer has specifically stated that 22 grams of the seized contraband was seized from the possession of accused-petitioner Khalilar Rahman. There is no whisper that any contraband was seized from the accused petitioner Motiur Rahman. On the other hand, he has been in custody with effect from 13.08.2020 and, as such, 41 days as on date. On perusal of the case diary, no such material is found against accused-petitioner Motiur Rahman requiring his further custodial detention. In view of the above, the accused petitioner Motiur Rahman is entitled to the grant of bail.

So far accused petitioner Khalilar Rahman is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted some medical documents to impress upon this Court that the 4 years old son of the accused petitioner Khalilar Rahman, namely, Sayed Mudassir Ahmed has been suffering from cancer and he has been undergoing Chemo Therapy. It has also been submitted that he has already taken two Chemo Therapy and is supposed to go to Apollo Hospital at Chennai for his third Chemo Therapy. I have also perused the discharged certificate at Page-102 of the petition, issued by Dr. B. Barooah Cancer Institute, Guwahati advising Chemo Therapy to the said child.

Mr. Dutta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has also submitted that there is nothing to disbelieve this discharge certificate, the same being issued by the competent authority of a premier cancer institute of the State of Assam.

It appears from the documents furnished that the son of the accused petitioner Khalilar Rahman, named above, has been suffering from the dreaded disease and is undergoing treatment and is required to leave for Chennai for further medical treatment. On the other hand, the accused petitioner was arrested on 13.08.2020 and, as such, he has been in custody for 41 days as on date. The quantity of contraband recovered is in-between small and commercial quantity. On perusal of the case diary it does not appear to this Court that further custodial detention of the accused petitioner Khalilar Rahman is necessary for the purpose of investigation of the case.

In view of the above, considering the period of detention and the facts indicated above, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the accused petitioner Khalilar Rahman also.

Accordingly, both the accused-petitioners, named above, shall be released on bail in connection with the case aforementioned on their furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- each with a suitable surety each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Kamrup (Metro) at Guwahati.

The direction for bail is further subject to the conditions that the accused-petitioners:

(a) shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of learned Special Judge, Kamrup (Metro) at Guwahati, without prior written permission from him;

(b) shall not hamper with the investigation, or tamper with the evidence of the case;

(c) 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.

In terms of the above, this bail application stands disposed of.

Return the case diary.