BA/66/2024 of NASRIN BEGUM Vs STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND ANR. on 7 November 2024

1. Smti. Sadiya Akthar,D/o Faruk GaziD/o Faruk Gazi R/o Patawakhali P.S: Bawol Bangladesh.

Presently lodged at District Prison and

2. Shri. Solayman Gazi,S/o Faruk Ghazi,S/o Faruk Ghazi, R/o Vill: Bakultala P.S: Shoronkhola Dist: Bagirhat, Bangladesh.

Presently lodged at District Prison andCorrectional Home, Jowai.

3. Md. Habib,S/o (L) Asim KhanR/o Vill: SatomaswalP.S: MatbariDist: Barisal, Bangladesh.

Presently lodged at District Prison andCorrectional Home, Jowai.

4. Shri. Dilwar Khan @ Del war,S/o Enuch Khan,R/o Vill: 4 Nos. WardP.S: SharankolaDist: Bhaginad, Bangladesh.Presently lodged at District Prison andCorrectional Home, Jowai.

5. Smti. Laboni Khatun,D/o (L) Mufis Sheikh,R/o Hulna VillageP.S: LopcharBangladesh.Presently lodged at District Prison andCorrectional Home, Jowai.

6. Shri. Luton Gazi @ Liton,S/o Faruk Gazi,R/o Vill: BakultalaP.S: ShoronkolaDist: Bhaginad, Bangladesh.Presently lodged at District Prison and

7. Md. Arsafat Kha @ Arajat,S/o Habib Khan,R/o Vill: SatomaswalP.S: MatbariDist: Barisal, Bangladesh.S/o Habib Khan,R/o Vill: SatomaswalP.S: MatbariDist: Barisal, Bangladesh.

Presently lodged at District Prison andCorrectional Home, Jowai.

8. Shri. Shahalom Hussain @ Sholon,S/o Kabir Hussain,P.S: Vill: JijanagarP.S: Feni Model ThanaDist: Ponispur, Bangladesh.S/o Kabir Hussain,P.S: Vill: JijanagarP.S: Feni Model ThanaDist: Ponispur, Bangladesh.

Presently lodged at District Prison andCorrectional Home, Jowai.

9. Md. Imran Khan,S/o Habib Khan,R/o Vill: SotmasalP.S: MatbariDist: Barisal, Bangladesh.

Presently lodged at District Prison andCorrectional Home, Jowai.

10. Smti. Munni Begum,D/o Rasel Sheikh,R/o Khulna VillageP.S: BaggerhatBangladesh.

Presently lodged at District Prison andCorrectional Home, Jowai.

11. Smti. Leki Begum @ Lakhi,D/o Jannet Farazi,R/o Sotomaswal VillageP.S: Matbari, Barisal DistrictBangladesh.

Presently lodged at District Prison and

12. Smti. Nasrin Begum,

D/o Md. Romis Sepal,R/o Jijanagar VillageP.S: JijanagarBangladesh.

Presently lodged at District Prison andCorrectional Home, Jowai.

13. Shri. Sohad Hussain @ Shahadt,S/o Shri. Manik Shikdar,R/o Vill: Borisal TarabariaP.S: UmwaDist: Kathalia, Bangladesh.

Presently lodged at District Prison andCorrectional Home, Jowai.

14. Md. Raja Gazi,S/o Faruk Gazi,R/o Vill: BakultalaP.S: SharankalaDist: Bhaginad, Bangladesh.

Presently lodged at District Prison andCorrectional Home, Jowai.

:::::Petitioners

-Vs-1.State of Meghalaya,Represented by Secretary,Home (Political) Department,Government of Meghalaya, Shillong.2.The Officer-in-Charge,Amlarem Police Station, Amlarem,West Jaintia Hills District:::::RespondentsCoram:Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, JudgeAppearance:For the Petitioner/Appellant(s): Mr. J. Shylla, Adv.Mr. M.L. Nongpiur, Adv.For the Respondent(s): Mr. K. Khan, PP. withMs. A. Thungwa, GA. i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc.:ii) Whether approved for publication in press:Yes/No COMMON JUDGMENT (ORAL)

1. These sets of bail applications filed under Section 483 (1) (b)Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023/Section 439 (1) (b)Cr.P.C read with Section 528 BNSS, 2023/Section 482 Cr.P.C. 1973

involving similar and identical facts and questions are proposed to bedisposed of by this common judgment.

2. The issue emanates from an FIR lodged by the complainant/S.I. D.B. Tyngkan of Amlarem, West Jaintia Hills District before theOfficer-in-Charge, Dawki Police Station, West Jaintia Hills District on16.06.2024. The contents of the FIR would reveal that the complainant,while on duty on 15.06.2024, had intercepted a Tourist vehicleproceeding from Dawki towards Pynursla, and on checking of the same,the occupants of the said vehicle were alleged to be Nationals ofBangladesh. Accordingly, the said occupants were arrested and confinedto judicial custody. There are about 17(seventeen) of such occupantswith 4(four) ladies who had 5(five) minor children with them.

3. The arrested persons, in due course, have preferred anapplication for grant of bail before the learned Judicial Magistrate FirstClass at Amlarem, West Jaintia Hills District and vide order dated20.08.2024, the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class was pleased toallow the detainees to be enlarged on bail with imposition of certain conditions. One of the conditions is for execution of a personal bond of₹ 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of like amount.

4. Mr. J. Shylla, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that it is because of such conditions that this Court is nowapproached with a prayer for modification of the same, inasmuch as, thepetitioners are able to find only one person, who has consented to standsurety for them.

5. This Court has also acknowledged the submission of Mr. K.Khan, learned PP assisted by Ms. A. Thungwa, learned GA appearing onbehalf of the State respondent, who has no objection to any order passedby this Court in this respect as far as the prayer of the petitioners areconcerned.

6. Without going into the merits of the case, since the limitedprayer of the petitioners is only for modifying of the bail conditions,which according to them is deemed to be stringent, this Court wouldunder the facts and circumstances allow the prayer made. Accordingly,the order dated 20.08.2024 (supra) being kept intact, the only modification to the same would be that instead of two sureties to beprovided by the petitioners, only one surety will suffice, provided he orshe satisfies the Trial Court below as to his solvency, etc.

7. The prayer of the learned counsel for the petitioners that oneperson is sufficient to stand surety for all the petitioners herein, is alsofound acceptable by this Court.

8. Accordingly, in view of the facts and circumstances which have been discussed, these bail applications are hereby disposed of witha direction that the petitioners shall be enlarged on bail on the modifiedconditions set forth hereinabove to the satisfaction of the learnedJudicial Magistrate First Class at Amlarem, West Jaintia Hills District.

9. No order as to costs.

Judge