Abul Sheikh vs. The State Of Assam
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Abdul Sheikh, sought bail in connection with Bagribari P.S. Case No. 33/2026, registered under Sections 303(2)/324(5)/317(4) of the BNS read with Sections 24/25/40 of the Assam Forest Regulation, 1891. The petitioner's counsel argued that forest items, specifically Sal logs, were recovered from an abandoned place and not from the petitioner's possession. The petitioner is a Chairman of a Village Council and a Class I-B Contractor, paying income tax and possessing a GST registration certificate. He was arrested on May 29, 2026, and had been in custody for 12 days. The State, represented by the Additional Public Prosecutor, contended that the investigation summary was prepared prematurely. They argued that the FIR indicated the seizure of Sal logs from unregistered vehicles and tractors, and witness statements implicated the petitioner as the kingpin in an illegal timber business spanning 10 years. The State asserted that further custodial interrogation was necessary as the case was in its initial stages.
Held
The Court held that despite the absence of direct recovery of forest goods from the petitioner's possession, bail could not be granted at this stage. The Court noted that while the Sal logs were recovered from an abandoned condition in the forest area, the investigation revealed the petitioner's alleged involvement in the business of illegal cutting, selling, and transporting of timbers for the past 10 years. Witness statements implicated the petitioner as the mastermind behind the alleged crime. Regarding the petitioner's financial status, the Court observed that while he held respectable positions and had some documented income sources, witnesses stated these were insufficient to support his lavish lifestyle, and no other source of income was established. The Court emphasized that the case was still in the initial stages of investigation, and further custodial interrogation of the petitioner might be required to unearth more facts and apprehend other accused individuals, given his alleged role as the main culprit. Therefore, considering the nature of the offense and the petitioner's involvement, the Court found it was not a fit case to grant bail.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail given that the seized forest produce was not recovered from his direct possession, considering his standing in the community and documented financial activities (GST registration, income tax payments)? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that the Sal logs were seized from an abandoned location, not from his possession. He highlighted his respectable position as Chairman of a Village Council and a Class I-B Contractor, supported by GST registration and income tax payments, suggesting a legitimate source of income. He also emphasized his cooperation and willingness to assist further investigation. Revenue's Argument: The State argued that the petitioner is the 'kingpin' of an illegal timber business operating for 10 years, as indicated by witness statements and the seizure of logs from unregistered vehicles. They contended that the petitioner's stated income sources were insufficient to explain his lavish lifestyle and that further custodial interrogation was crucial for uncovering more facts and potential co-accused, as the investigation was in its initial stages.
Sections Cited
Section 24, Section 25, Section 40, Section 303(2), Section 324(5), Section 317(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 09-06-20
26 Heard Mr. HRA Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. K. Boruah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State respondent.
This is an application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, praying for grant of bail to the accused/petitioner, namely, Abdul Sheikh in connection
Page No.# 2/5 with Bagribari P.S. Case No. 33/2026 registered under Sections 303(2)/324(5)/317(4) of the BNS read with Sections 24/25/40 of the Assam Forest Regulation, 1891. 3. Case Diary received. Perused the same.
It is submitted by Mr. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel that from the FIR itself it is seen that all the forest items i.e., Sal logs were recovered and seized from an abandon place and it is not a case that those articles were seized from the possession of the petitioner. However, from the investigation summery, it is seen that the I.O. made a query that without any known source of income, how the petitioner can live such a lavish life.
In that context, it is submitted by Mr. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel that the petitioner has been appointed as a Chairman of Village Council District Committee, BTC and after proper verification of all police record etc., he is considered to be one of the respectable person in that locality. That apart he is a Class I-B Contractor and he also submitted some GST registration certificate in his name and it is further submitted that he is also paying income tax and the TDS statement is also annexed along with this petition.
Mr. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel further submitted that the accused petitioner got arrested in connection with this case on 29.05.2026 and since last 12 days he is in custody, thus, the I.O. got sufficient opportunity to interrogate him, keeping him in custody. He further submitted that all the seized articles were seized from an abandoned place and the present petitioner is no way connected in the alleged recovery, nor it was recovered from any conscious possession of the petitioner.
He being the respectable person of that locality and considering this Page No.# 3/5 aspect, he may be released on bail. However, the petitioner is still ready and willing to extend his cooperation in the further investigation of the case, if he is granted with the privilege of bail.
Mr. Borthakur, learned APP submitted that the summery of the investigation was prepared on the first day of his arrest without further enquiry with regard to him income. Further on the day of arrest, he moved a bail application which was rejected considering sufficient incriminating materials in the case diary.
He further submitted that from the FIR itself, it is seen that there were seizure of Sal logs which were found in three numbers of thertheri without having any number plate, one number of DI truck without having any number plate and also some of the Sal logs were recovered from one tractor without having any registration number. From the statement made by the witnesses and from the materials available in the case diary, it also reveals that the petitioner is the kingpin of the entire crime and since last 10 years he is doing that business of cutting, selling and transporting Sal logs without any permission. Many of the witnesses implicated the present petitioner showing his involvement in the alleged offence. More so, the petitioner got arrested in connection with case only on 29.05.2026 and the case is at the very initial stage of investigation and hence, further custodial interrogation of the present petitioner may be required to unearth some more fact of the case and accordingly he raised vehement objection in allowing the petitioner to go on bail.
Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and I have also perused the case diary.
From the case diary, it reveals that huge quantity of the Sal logs
Page No.# 4/5 seized/recovered from the place of occurrence in an abandon condition in three thertheri without having any number plate, one number of DI truck without having any number plate and also some of the Sal logs were recovered from one tractor without having any registration number.
It is a fact that there was no recovery from the possession of the petitioner and all the Sal logs were recovered in the forest area which were kept in abandoned condition. But during the investigation it has come to the knowledge of the I.O. that the present petitioner is running the said business of illegal cutting, selling transporting of timbers and he is running the said business for the last 10 years. From the statement made by the witnesses also it is seen that the petitioner is the master mind who is behind the alleged crime of illegal cutting, selling transporting of Sal logs which are most valuable forest product.
Regarding the financial status of the petitioner, it is explained that he is a Class I-B Contractor and that he has some other business and also holding the respectable post Chairman of Village Council District Committee, BTC. But all the witnesses have stated in their deposition that source of income which has been shown cannot be sufficient to live such a lavish life and there is no source of other income for the present petitioner to establish his income.
Further it is seen that the case is still under initial stage of investigation and the investigation is still under process, wherein it is also found that the Sal logs were about to carry for transportation in some vehicles/tractors etc. without having any valid registration number and without having any number plate.
So to investigate the involvement of other persons in the present case will also require some more time for the investigating officer and further custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be required to unearth some more facts of Page No.# 5/5 the case or to nab some other accused, as the petitioner is stated to be the main culprit of the offence.
So only considering the fact that the forest goods/timers were not recovered from the petitioner, the bail cannot be granted to the present petitioner at this stage wherein sufficient incriminating materials have already been collected by the I.O.
Considering all these aspect of the case, nature of the offence and the involvement of the petitioner, this Court of the opinion that it is not at all a fit case to extend the privilege of bail to the present petitioner at this stage.
Accordingly, this bail application of the petitioner, Abdul Sheikh in Bagribari P.S. Case No. 33/2026 under Sections 303(2)/324(5)/317(4) of the BNS read with Sections 24/25/40 of the Assam Forest Regulation, 1891 stands rejected.
This bail application accordingly stands disposed of.
Return the case diary herewith.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Reproduced from the public record of the Gauhati High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.