Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./3642/2026 of SRI SABURUDDIN SHEIKH Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 11 November 2026
GAHC010248972026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3642/2026 SRI SABURUDDIN SHEIKH S/O LATE AJIJUL SHEIKH, RESIDENT OF VILL. JOYPUR, P.S. KOKRAJHAR, DIST. KOKRAJHAR, BTR, ASSAM PIN 783370 VERSUS THE STATE OF
GAHC010248972026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./3642/2026
SRI SABURUDDIN SHEIKH
S/O LATE AJIJUL SHEIKH, RESIDENT OF VILL. JOYPUR, P.S. KOKRAJHAR, DIST. KOKRAJHAR, BTR, ASSAM PIN 783370
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A A R KARIM, MD S A MONDAL,MR. A DEB,A ISLAM
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN
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
Date : 12.11.2026
Heard Mr. AAR Karim, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. KK Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Pathsala PS Case No. 107/2026 registered under Section 305(a)/331(4) of BNS, 2023. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner was arrested on 25.09.2026 was lodged by the owner of a jewellery shop stating inter alia that on 14.09.2026 at around 02:15 am, some unknown miscreants had looted gold and silver ornaments valued at Rs. 50 lakhs as well as cash of Rs. 5 lakhs.
3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was arrested only on suspicion and that although it is stated that stolen articles were recovered from his possession but at the same time, the police stated that further stolen articles are yet to be recovered. He also submits that the petitioner has been inside the jail for the last 48 days.
4. On the other hand, Mr. KK Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State submits that the Investigating Officer had recovered the stolen articles from the possession of the petitioner and another which shows his complicity in the offence.
5. Upon considerations of the submissions made by the learned Counsels for the parties, more so in view of the fact that the petitioner has been inside the jail for quite some time and also due to the fact that there is discrepancy in stating about the recovery of the stolen articles, this Court deems it fit to enlarge the petitioner on bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the CJM, Bajali under the following conditions:
i) the petitioner will appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for.
ii) the petitioner will not hamper, tamper with the evidence, neither influence the witnesses connected with the case.
iii) the petitioner will not leave the place of jurisdiction without the permission of the concerned Court.
6. Petition is disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant