Ahidul Islam vs. The State Of Assam

Held

The Court allowed the bail application of the petitioner, Ahidul Islam. The Court considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the case diary. While the State argued that there were incriminating materials against the petitioner, specifically the statement of co-accused Ismail Hussain indicating the petitioner's role in providing fake GST challans, the Court also took into account the progress of the investigation, which had reached a considerable extent. Crucially, the Court considered the prayer for bail on parity. The Court noted that several co-accused, including Ismail Hussain, Dr. Ajit Kr. Nath, and Alekzander Rahman, had already been granted pre-arrest bail in connection with related matters. Based on these considerations, the Court found it appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The petitioner was directed to furnish a bail bond of Rs. 30,000/- with a suitable surety to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, North Salmara, Abhayapuri, Bongaigaon. A condition was imposed that the petitioner must refrain from engaging in such alleged activities, failing which his bail would stand cancelled. The bail application was disposed of in terms of these directions.

Facts

The petitioner, Ahidul Islam, is seeking bail in connection with Jogighopa PS Case No. 96/2023, registered under sections 120(B)/420/468/471/34 IPC. The FIR alleges that individuals were selling fake GST challans for coal-laden trucks, evading taxes. During an apprehension, one Khushumohan Siddha was seized along with a register and mobile, and four coal trucks were brought to the police station on suspicion of using fake GST challans. Investigation revealed the involvement of a GST Officer, Dr. Ajit Nath, and other accused persons in the racket. The petitioner is not named in the FIR, but his name was allegedly revealed by a co-accused, Ismail Hussain. The petitioner claims parity with other co-accused who have been granted pre-arrest bail.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. given his alleged involvement in a GST evasion racket? (Mixed question of law and fact, turning on Section 439 Cr.P.C. and principles of bail). Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner is not named in the FIR. He seeks bail on the ground of parity, as co-accused Ismail Hussain, Dr. Ajit Kr. Nath, and Alekzander Rahman @ Alexandar Rahman have been granted pre-arrest bail in related matters (AB No.1075/2023, AB No.1012/2023, AB No.1046/2023 respectively). Other accused like Ismail Hussain, Hasan @ Fakrul Hasan Khan, and Navin @ Nabin Baishnab have also been granted pre-arrest bail in AB No.1075/2023. Revenue's arguments: The State, through the learned Addl. PP, objects to the bail application, stating that there are incriminating materials in the case diary against the petitioner. The statement of co-accused Ismail Hussain allegedly reveals that the petitioner provided fake GST challans to Ismail Hussain, who then supplied them to coal traders.