Shajamal Hoque vs The State Of Assam
2025 Latest Caselaw 8600 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Shajamal Hoque vs The State Of Assam on 17 November, 2025

Author: Parthivjyoti Saikia

Bench: Parthivjyoti Saikia

                                                                                           Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010245262025




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

                                       Case No. : AB/2704/2025

             SHAJAMAL HOQUE
             S/O- ABDUL HAI R/O- ROUMARI P.S- BOKO DIST- KAMRUP, ASSAM


             VERSUS

             THE STATE OF ASSAM
             REPRESENTED BY THE P.P., ASSAM



Advocate for the Petitioner     : MR. A PARAMANIK, P. KALITA

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,




                                     BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA

                                               ORDER

17.112025

Heard Mr. A Paramanik, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. K. K. Porasor, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam.

This is an application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 in respect of Criminal Case No. 24/2024 in State Cyber Investigation Centre, CCW, Hqrs, Chennai, Tamilnadu.

The petitioner Shajamal Hoque submits that the aforesaid case has been registered against him at Chennai and he wants to surrender before the Court at Chennai having territorial jurisdiction.

Page No.# 2/2

Therefore, the petitioner submits that he may be given 15(fifteen) days' time to that effect so that he can go to Chennai and surrender before the appropriate court. Mr. Paramanik has relied upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court that was delivered in Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka, (2024) 4 SCC 749. Paragraph 93.4 of the said judgment is quoted as under:

93.4. The applicant for anticipatory bail must satisfy the court regarding his inability to seek anticipatory bail from the court which has the territorial jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence.

The grounds raised by the applicant may be--

(a) a reasonable and immediate threat to life, personal liberty and bodily harm in the jurisdiction where the FIR is registered;

(b) the apprehension of violation of right to liberty or impediments owing to arbitrariness;

(c) the medical status/disability of the person seeking extra-territorial limited anticipatory bail.

Mr. Paramanik further submits that the petitioner belongs to the State of Assam and from here it is not possible for him to seek any anticipatory bail from the court having territorial jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence. The prayer prays for only 15(fifteen) days' time to go to Chennai to seek bail or to surrender before the appropriate court.

I have considered the submission made by the learned counsel of both sides. Since the petitioner is interested in surrendering before the appropriate court having jurisdiction, this court is of the opinion that the petitioner should be given one opportunity to that effect. Therefore, his application is allowed. The petitioner shall surrender before the appropriate court on 04.12.2025.

If he is arrested before 03.12.2025 by the State Cyber Investigation Centre, CCW, Hqrs, Chennai, Tamilnadu within the territory of Assam he shall be released on bail of Rs.1,00,000/- with a surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority. This benefit of anticipatory bail shall be in force till 03.12.2025 only. After that day, this benefit shall not exist and the petitioner shall have to procure anticipatory bail or other reliefs from court having territorial jurisdiction at Chennai.

The anticipatory bail application is accordingly disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant