Md. Sanful Ali @ Chanful Ali vs State Of Assam

The Court proceedings have been conducted through remote video conferencing mode due to the prevailing situation in the State due to Covid-19

pandemic. Heard Mr. E. Ahmed, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner and Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the

respondent State of Assam.

By this application under Section 439, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), the accused-petitioner viz. Md. Sanful Ali @ Chanful Ali has prayed

for his release on bail, as he is in custody since 20.05.2021 in connection with Hajo Police Station Case no. 619/2020, registered under Sections

143/120B/447/387/506, Indian Penal Code (IPC).

It is found that the accused-petitioner was earlier arrested and remanded to custody on 19.03.2021 in connection with Hajo Police Station Case no.

345/2021 registered for offences under Sections 387/395/379, IPC read with Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act, 1989.

The First Information Report (FIR) in connection with Hajo Police Station Case no. 619/2020 was lodged on 26.06.2020. In the FIR, the informant had

alleged that about 3 months earlier 9 (nine) nos. of the accused persons including the present accused-petitioner as accused no. 4, had uprooted the

boundary posts erected in the boundaries of the informant’s plot of land and after encroaching a portion of the informant’s land, they had

planted boundary posts inside the informant’s plot of land. When the informant protested, they demanded an amount of Rs. 15,000/- and out of

fear, the informant had to pay the said amount. When the accused-petitioner is in custody in connection with Hajo Police Station Case no. 345/2021,

he was shown arrested in Hajo Police Station Case no. 619/2020 on 20.05.2021 and since then he is in custody.

The learned counsel for the accused-petitioner has submitted that the accused-petitioner was falsely implicated in the case and the FIR was lodged

after 3 months of the alleged date of occurrence. It is further submitted by him that considering the period of detention, the accused-petitioner may be

allowed to go on bail as the investigation of the case registered on 26.06.2020 must have progressed considerably.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that he has received the concerned case diary. He has submitted, on the basis of the materials

available in the case diary, that the materials in the case diary indicate that the accused-petitioner was found involved in the act of encroachment on

the alleged date of incident. Other than the informant the witnesses whose statements are available in the case diary, have stated that they have heard

about extorting an amount from the informant.

I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and taken note of the materials available in the case diary, as referred to by

the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

The case was registered on 26.06.2020 and the accused-petitioner was shown arrested only on 20.05.2021 whereas he was in custody in connection

with Hajo Police Station Case no. 345/2021 since 19.03.2021. The materials in the case diary go to suggest that the investigation of the case have

progressed substantially.

Considering the period of detention of the accused-petitioner and the progress of investigation made in the case so far, this Court is of the considered

view that further custodial detention of the accused-petitioner is not necessary for the purpose of carrying out investigation of the case and his release

on bail, at this stage of investigation, is not likely to cause any prejudicial effect in the further investigation, provided he continues to extend his

assistance and co-operation in the further investigation of the case.

Accordingly, it is directed that the accused-petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with one local surety of the like

amount to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hajo, subject to the conditions that :-

[i] the accused-petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required by the Investigating

Officer (I.O.) of the case;

[ii] the accused-petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with the facts of the case

so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;

[iii] the accused-petitioner shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be

collected by the police;

[iv] the accused-petitioner shall maintain law and order and he shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or of the

commission of which he is suspected; and

[v] the accused-petitioner shall regularly remain present during the trial and co-operate the Court to complete the trial for the above offences, if

charge sheeted in the case.

The application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.