Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./2304/2026 of HABIBUR RAHMAN AND 2 ORS. Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 30 August 2026
GAHC010168822026 2026:GAU-AS:12565 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2304/2026 HABIBUR RAHMAN AND 2 ORS. S/O MAJNUR ALI, R/O LOHARAKATA, P.S. MUKALMUA, P.O. MUKALMUA, DISTRICT NALBARI, ASSAM. 2: BATEN BHUYAN S/O ISAB
GAHC010168822026
2026:GAU-AS:12565
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./2304/2026
HABIBUR RAHMAN AND 2 ORS.
S/O MAJNUR ALI, R/O LOHARAKATA, P.S. MUKALMUA, P.O. MUKALMUA, DISTRICT NALBARI, ASSAM.
2: BATEN BHUYAN
S/O ISAB BHUYAN
PERMANENT RESIDENT OF KOTHALBHURI
P.S. SARTHEBARI
P.O. PACHIM MAZDIA
DISTRICT BARPETA
ASSAM
PIN 781305.
3: SAIFUL ISLAM
S/O NASER ALI
PERMANENT RESIDENT OF KATHALBHURI
P.S. SARTHEBARI
P.O. KATHALBHURI
DISTRICT BARPETA
ASSAM
PIN 781305
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M A SHEIKH, MS S AHMED,MS F INTAZ
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
B E F O R E
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
31.08.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS praying for grant of bail to the accused/petitioners, in connection with Changsari P.S. Case No. 176/2026, registered under Section 303(2)/317(3) of the BNSS, 2023, read with Section 11(1)(a)(d) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act, 1960, read with Section 13(1) of the Assam Cattle Prevention (Amendment), Act, 2021.
3. As per the allegations in the FIR, during naka checking on 29.07.2026, a truck was intercepted by the police and 30 male bull cattle of various breeds and colors were recovered there from. Petitioner No. 1 was the driver of the said vehicle, petitioner No. 2 was the driver of an Alto vehicle allegedly escorting the aforesaid truck, and petitioner No. 3 was a co-passenger in the said Alto vehicle.
4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the aforesaid cattle were not stolen property, but were purchased by one Baharul Bhuyan and Rahij Uddin. In this regard, the purchase receipts have also been annexed to the bail application. Therefore, it is argued that Sections 303(2) & 317(3) of the BNS are not attracted, and the offence under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act entails a penalty of fine only.
5. Having regard to the above submissions, the period of detention of 42 days, and the fact that the cattle have already been recovered, further detention of the petitioners is not warranted.
6. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is allowed.
7. The petitioners were allowed to go on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Kamrup(Metro) in connection with the aforesaid case. JUDGE Comparing Assistant