SIDDIQUI ALI Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mrs. N.G. Shylla, learned Sr. GA appearing on behalf of the State respondent who has submitted that as far as the status of the case in question is concerned, the stage is only at the filing of charge sheet and the matter has not yet been committed to the Sessions Court by the Magisterial Court since sessions triable Sec. are involved. In this respect, it could be presumed that the actual trial has not yet commenced.

(2.) Mr. S.A. Sheikh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused person herein, has led this Court to the order dtd. 12/7/2023 passed by this Court in BA. No. 16 of 2023 involving the same accused herein, wherein in the said order, while declining to enlarge the accused therein who is also the accused herein on bail, an observation has been made by this Court that 'If no evidence is recorded within 1(one) month from today, the accused person in question is at liberty to approach a competent court or even this Court for grant of bail"' The admitted position as indicated above is that evidence has not yet been recorded, therefore, this Court, being bound by its own order, would be compelled to allow the prayer made in this application.

(3.) Accordingly, the accused person, Shri. Waliul Islam son of the petitioner herein is hereby enlarged on bail in connection with Phulbari P.S. Case No. 48 (6) of 2022 under Sec. 397/395/34 IPC on the following conditions that: