Chinmoy Lahkar vs The State Of Assam
2025 Latest Caselaw 1648 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Chinmoy Lahkar vs The State Of Assam on 31 July, 2025

                                                                         Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010150112025




                                                                  undefined

                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
     (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                               Case No. : Bail Appln./2207/2025

            CHINMOY LAHKAR
            S/O BIREN KUMAR LAHKAR @ BIREN LAHKAR
            R/O H. NO. 4, MAHATMA GANDHI PATH, CHRISTIAN BASTI,
            P.S. DISPUR, DIST. KAMRUP (M), GUWAHATI, ASSAM



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM
            REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM



Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR P KATAKI, MRS R BEGUM,MR D CHAKRABORTY

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

                                   BEFORE
                 HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA

                                           ORDER

Date : 31.07.2025

Heard Mr. P. Kataki, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that arrest of the present petitioner in connection with Tangla Police Station Case No. 59/2025 under Page No.# 2/3

Section 5 of the Explosive Substance Act read with Section 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, is in violation of the guidelines of the Apex Court in the case of Uday Chand versus Sheikh Mohd. Abdullah, Chief Minister, Jammu and Kashmir reported in 1993 (2) SCC 417 as well as the judgment of this Court in the case of Kamal Dutta Versus Union of India and Ors. reported in 2015 SCC OnLine Gau 759.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that while the petitioner was detained behind the bars in connection with NIA Special Case No. 02/2019, no outsiders could have met him without the leave of the Trial Court i.e. the Special Judge, NIA and under such circumstances, the accusation against him that he conspired with Jumon Borah, who is a member of Revolutionary Front of Greater Assam, is a false accusation.

4. At this, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that though the Case Diary is before the Court, however, he seeks some time to respond to the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner regarding applicability of the judgment of Uday Chand versus Sheikh Mohd. Abdullah (supra) and Kamal Dutta Versus Union of India (supra) in the instant case.

5. Time is granted.

6. The prayer is allowed.

7. Let the case be listed on 08.08.2025.

JUDGE Page No.# 3/3

Comparing Assistant