Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2025 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. Gauhati High Court/
  4. 2024/
  5. August

Tayeb Ali and Anr vs. the State of Assam

Decided on 31 August 2024• Citation: AB/2117/2024• Gauhati High Court
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                                                                   Page No.# 1/3    
        GAHC010161052024                                                            
                             THE  GAUHATI    HIGH   COURT                           
          (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL  PRADESH)           
                                 Case No. : AB/2117/2024                            
                 TAYEB ALI AND ANR                                                  
                 S/O JAMAN ALI                                                      
                 R/O VILL- CHOUTAKI PART-I, P.O. SALAKATI, P.S. KOKRAJHAR           
                 DIST. KOKRAJHAR, ASSAM                                             
                 2: SAHAJAMAL ALI                                                   
                 S/O MAGREB ALI                                                     
                 R/O VILL- CHOUTAKI PART-I                                          
                 P.O. SALAKATI                                                      
                 P.S. KOKRAJHAR                                                     
                 DIST. KOKRAJHAR                                                    
                 ASSA                                                               
                 VERSUS                                                             
                 THE STATE OF ASSAM                                                 
                 REP BY THE PP, ASSAM                                               
        Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M A MONDAL, MR. A ISLAM                   
        Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,                                    
                                       BEFORE                                       
                       HONOURABLE  MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA                      
                                       ORDER                                        
        Date : 31.08.2024                                                           
           Heard Mr. M.A. Mondal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B.

                                                                   Page No.# 2/3    
        Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor.                                
        2.   This Anticipatory Bail application is preferred by the petitioner Nos. 1 and
        2 under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS)      
        apprehending arrest in connection with an FIR dated 26.06.2024, which was   
        lodged by the informant one Lt Col Deepak Ranjan Gogoi (Retd.).             
        3.   The said FIR was received and registered as Kokrajhar Police Station Case
        No.144/2024 under Section 392 of IPC. In the said FIR, it was alleged that an
        amount of Rs.34,51,816/- (Rupees Thirty Four Lakhs Fifty One Thousand Eight 
        Hundred Sixteen) only in cash which was required to be deposited in the     
        Tengapara, Kokrajhar Branch of Axis Bank by the Cash Executive of the       
        Company  namely, Sri Prasenjit Aich, along with Gunman Sri Rajib Ray and the
        Driver of the Van, Sri Tutan Barman. As the amount was being carried to the 
        bank for being deposited, they were snatched away by two motor cycle riders.
        4.   During the course of the investigation, 3 (three) persons were taken into
        custody, namely, the Cash Executive of the Company namely, Prasenjit Aich, the
        Driver of the Van, Tutan Barman and one Nurul Amin Mandal.                  
        5.   The present petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with the alleged
        offences however, it is submitted that they are not at all connected with the
        offences alleged.                                                           
        6.   The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner No.1 is
        the owner of the bike, which is alleged to have been involved in the said   
        offence. And the petitioner No.2 is also apprehending arrest for the reasons
        beyond his comprehension.                                                   
        7.   It is submitted on behalf of both the petitioners that they are not    
        connected with the alleged offences.                                        

                                                                   Page No.# 3/3    
        8.   Case Diary in the matter was called for and Mr. B. Sarma, learned      
        Additional Public Prosecutor has placed the Case Diary before the Court. It is
        submitted by the learned Additional P.P that subsequently Section 193/120   
        (B)/395 was added during the course of the investigation.                   
        9.   After careful perusal of the Case Diary, it is seen that the matter is still
        under  investigation and charge-sheet has not been  filed. During the       
        investigation there are certain materials which are present in the Case Diary,
        which reflects that the petitioner No.1 not only is the owner of the bike but
        there are materials which shows his involvement in the alleged conspiracy to
        illegally snatch the amount of Rs.34,51,816/- (Rupees Thirty Four Lakhs Fifty
        One Thousand Eight Hundred Sixteen) only belonging to the ‘M/s Radiant Cash 
        Management  Services Ltd’ and which amount was required to be deposited in  
        the Tengapara, Kokrajhar Branch of Axis Bank. Further materials in the Case 
        Diary reveal that there are cash shares paid to the petitioner No.1 for being the
        owner of the bike involved the alleged offence. There are materials to show that
        the petitioner No.2 was one of the riders on the bike who is allegedly involved in
        the snatching of the bag containing the said amount.                        
        10.  Considering the stage of investigation and the incriminating materials 
        available in the Case Diary which clearly implicates the petitioners, the prayer
        for Anticipatory Bail at this stage stands rejected.                        
        11.  This Anticipatory Bail is accordingly stands disposed of.              
        12.  Case Diary be returned.                                                
                                              JUDGE                                 
        Comparing Assistant