Allowed

Dilip Thakur v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC12 Dec 2018AB/2647/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for anticipatory bail, the Gauhati High Court converted an interim order dated 30.08.2018 into an absolute order. The court noted the petitioner's cooperation and lack of hesitation in the investigation as grounds for the decision.

What did the court decide?

The interim anticipatory bail granted on 30.08.2018 is made absolute subject to non-interference and non-hampering of investigation.

Dilip Thakur Vs the State of Assam — Anticipatory Bail | Gauhati HC (2018)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010190682018

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB 2647/2018

¶5

1:DILIP THAKUR

¶6

S/O- SRI SAMBHU THAKUR, R/O- LOHARPOTTY, P.S- TINGKHONG, DISTDIBRUGARH, ASSAM, PIN-

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. T SOM

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶11

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR

¶12

ORDER

¶13

Date : 12-12-2018

¶14

Heard Ms. T. Som, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. N. Dutta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State respondent.

¶15

By this application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the petitioner, namely, Sri Dilip Thakur has prayed for granting anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in connection with Tingkhong P.S. Case No. 156/2018 under Section 366 IPC.

¶16

The case diary as called for is placed before this court.

¶17

Ms. Som, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that as per

¶18

Page No.# 2/2

¶19

the terms of the interim anticipatory bail granted vide order, dated 30.08.2018, the petitioner has appeared before the I.O. and has given his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C.

¶20

Mr. Dutta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam submits that the petitioner has appeared before the I.O. and there is no adverse report from the I.O. regarding the petitioner’s conduct during the period of interim anticipatory bail.

¶21

Mr. Dutta further submits that the petitioner is co-operating in the investigation and on the other hand, the petitioner being a permanent resident, there is no chance of him jumping the courses of investigation and trial.

¶22

The case diary reveals that the investigation has substantially progressed and as such, further detention of the accused is not warranted.

¶23

Having regard to the above facts submitted by the learned counsel for both the sides and also that the petitioner has given his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and further that he is co-operating in the investigation, the interim anticipatory bail granted vide order, dated 30.08.2018, is hereby made absolute, subject to the conditions:-

¶24

(a) that the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, thereat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer; and

¶25

(b) that the petitioner shall not hamper or tamper in investigation.

¶26

Return the case diary.

¶27

With the above directions, the petition stands disposed of.

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Dilip Thakur v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilip Thakur v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pradip Laskar and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Wahab Ali and 5 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Sri Sanjoy Kumar Bhowmik Vs the State of Assam

Abdul Awal Ahmed @ Abdul Awal (Manik) Vs the State of Assam

Nagen Boro and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Mirija Begum @ Merijan Begum @ Nunu and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam