Hifzur Rahman Choudhury vs. The State Of Assam

Held

The Court granted pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. The Court found that the investigation in the case had substantially progressed and that custodial interrogation of the petitioner might not be required in the interest of the ongoing investigation. The Court reasoned that while the FIR detailed serious allegations of illegal coal transportation, tax evasion (including GST on lesser volumes of coal), use of forged documents, and stocking without licenses, the release of the seized vehicles indicated a stage where further custodial interrogation might not be essential. The ratio decidendi is that if the investigation is substantially progressed and custodial interrogation is not deemed necessary for its progress, pre-arrest bail can be granted even in cases involving economic offenses. The petitioner was directed to furnish a bail bond of Rs. 15,000/- with a surety of like amount, subject to conditions including appearing before the Investigating Officer within 7 days, not inducing witnesses, and refraining from committing similar offenses.

Facts

This is a second pre-arrest bail application filed by Hifzur Rahman Choudhury, apprehending arrest in connection with Karimganj P.S. Case No. 535/2021, registered under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including those related to cheating, forgery, and criminal conspiracy. The petitioner's earlier pre-arrest bail application was rejected by the High Court. The FIR alleges a large-scale illegal coal transportation and export business in Karimganj district, involving the use of forged documents, evasion of GST, and transportation of overloaded trucks. The petitioner claims innocence, stating he is a farmer and not involved in coal business, nor owns the trucks or coal seized. The seized coal-laden trucks have reportedly been released on zimma to their owners.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. given the allegations of involvement in illegal coal trade, tax evasion, and use of forged documents? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contends he is innocent and falsely implicated. He asserts he is a farmer by profession, not involved in the coal export-import business, and does not own the trucks or the coal in question. He argues that custodial interrogation is not required. Revenue/State's arguments: The State, through the Additional Public Prosecutor, submitted that the seized vehicles with coal have already been released on zimma by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karimganj, after obtaining a report from the investigating officer. The State did not explicitly argue against the bail but presented the status of the seized goods.