Gauhati High Court

Amir Ali vs The State Of Assam on 2 May, 2025

                                                                        Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010011442025




                                                                 undefined

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

                               Case No. : Bail Appln./174/2025

           AMIR ALI
           S/O LT.NAZIR PARAMANIK
           R/OVILL-JHAGRARPAR PT. IV, P.S.AND DIST. DHUBRI,ASSAM



           VERSUS

           THE STATE OF ASSAM
           REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM



Advocate for the Petitioner : MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ, MR Z HUSSAIN,MS F INTAZ,SAMIM
RAHMAN,A S CHOUDHURY,MR A W AMAN,MR. SURAJIT DAS

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,




            Linked Case : Bail Appln./334/2025

           ABU BAKKAR SIDDIQUE @ ABU BAKKER SIDDIQUE
           S/O KASHEM ALI
           RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KISMAT HASDAHA PART 4
           PO. DHARMASALA
           PS AND DIST DHUBRI
           ASSAM 783324


            VERSUS
                                                                          Page No.# 2/3

           THE STATE OF ASSAM
           REPRESENTED BY THE PP
           ASSAM


           ------------
           Advocate for : MR A H AHMED
           Advocate for : PP
           ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM



                                 BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN

                                      ORDER

02.05.2025

Heard Mr. S. Das, learned counsel for the accused persons and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. Mr. Das submits that since Mr. Borthakur has relied upon a decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ram Kishor Arora vs. Directorate of Enforcement, reported in (2024) 7 SCC 599 to contend that the effect of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pankaj Bansal vs. Union of India, reported in (2024) 7 SCC 576, will be prospective in nature and as such, the present accused persons are not entitled to the benefit of the decision of Vihaan Kumar vs. State of Haryana and Another, reported in (2025) SCC OnLine SC 269, he may be granted some time to go through both the decisions.

The prayer is allowed.

List the matter on 16.05.2025.

JUDGE Page No.# 3/3

Comparing Assistant