Mamunur Rashid vs The State Of Assam
2025 Latest Caselaw 8340 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Mamunur Rashid vs The State Of Assam on 6 November, 2025

                                                                         Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010106272025




                                                                  undefined

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

                               Case No. : Bail Appln./1727/2025

            MAMUNUR RASHID
            SON OF EUSUF ALI
            VILL HAJI PARA
            P.S. HOWLY
            DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM
            PIN-781316.



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM
            TO BE REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM



Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR H R A CHOUDHURY, B DAS,MR. I U CHOWDHURY

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,




                                   BEFORE
                 HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA

                                           ORDER

06.11.2025

1. Heard Mr. A.M. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner Page No.# 2/3

has been languishing behind the bars since 12.09.2022 in connection with Session Case No.10/2023, arising out of Barpeta P.S. Case No.763/2022, under Sections 120(B)/121/121-A of IPC, read with Sections 17/18/18(B)/19/20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and some of the co-accused have been granted bail by the co-ordinate bench of this court, hence, on the ground of parity as well as on the ground of prolong incarceration, the learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for bail of the present petitioner.

3. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised the question of maintainability of the instant bail application. He submits that the bail application of the present petitioner was rejected by the court of learned Sessions Judge, Barpeta by order dated 18.12.2024. He submits that since the offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 are involved in this case and since the said offences are schedule offences under the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, hence, the Sessions Judge, while trying the offence under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, was exercising powers conferred under Section 22(3) of the NIA Act, 2008.

4. He submits that in such a case, any rejection of a bail application, even by the Sessions Judge, is appealable under Section 21(4) of the NIA Act, 2008. In support of his submissions, he has cited the Full Bench judgment of the Madras High Court in the Case of Jaffar Sathiq vs. State reported in 2021 online Madras 2593 as well as the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Bikram Jit Singh vs. State of Punjab reported in 2010 SCC 616.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised the plea of maintainability of this bail application for the first time, he may be given some time to respond to the Page No.# 3/3

same.

6. The prayer is allowed.

7. Let this matter be listed on 12.11.2025 for hearing on the questions of maintainability of this instant bail application.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant