AMINUL HOQUE v. THE STATE OF ASSAM
Court: Gauhati High Court
Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIR ALFAZ ALI
Judgment date:
Case summary
Gauhati High Court judgment dated 2020-01-27. AMINUL HOQUE v. THE STATE OF ASSAM. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
Page No. # 1/2 GAHC010015442020 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln. 242/2020 1:AMINUL HOQUE S/O- MD. ABDUS SUMAD, R/O- VILL- SIMALUBARI, P. S- KHARUPETIA, DIST- DARRANG, ASSAM VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B CHOWDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIR ALFAZ ALI ORDER Date : 27-01-2020 This application under Section 439 Cr. PC, has been filed praying for bail of the petitioner, namely, Md. Aminul Hoque, who is in detention in connection with Mangaldoi P. S. Case No. 645/2019 (GR No. 2468/2019) under Section 406/420/468/471 IPC R/W Section 66(D) of I. T. Act. Heard Mr. B. Choudhury, learned counsel and Mr. T. K. Mishra, learned Addl. P. P. for the respondent. Perused the FIR and the documents annexed with the petition. Page No.
# 2/2 The allegation in the FIR was that one Rejaul Karim created an unauthorized ID in PM-KISAN Portal in Darrang district and uploaded 8458 numbers of beneficiaries therein. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the main accused, named in the FIR has already been enlarged on bail and the petitioner has been in custody since 29. 12. 2019. Having considered the allegation made in the FIR and that the principal accused named in the FIR has already been granted bail, further custodial detention of the petitioner is not considered necessary in the interest of investigation. Accordingly, the petitioner is allowed to be enlarged on bail of Rs. 20,000/- with one suitable surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Darrang, Mangaldoi, subject, of course, to the following conditions: 1. The accused petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation as and when required; 2.
The accused petitioner 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. 3. The accused petitioner shall not commit any similar offence, of which he is accused or suspected commission. Bail application is disposed of. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Source: Gauhati High Court. Archive: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.