Single-judge order rejecting a Section 438 CrPC application for pre-arrest bail. The petitioner, CEO of an alleged fraudulent financial institution, was denied bail citing the nature of the blanco economic offence and its impact on society.
Pre-arrest bail prayer rejected; anticipatory bail application disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010198542018
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB 2803/2018
1:SUBRATA PURKAYASTHA
S/O- LATE SATYENDRA PURKAYASTHA, R/O- MOHANPUR, P.S- ALGAPUR, DIST- HAILAKANDI, ASSAM
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MRS. R RONGMEI
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIR ALFAZ ALI
ORDER
Date : 04-10-2018
By this application u/s 438 CrPC, the petitioner, namely, Subrata Purkayastha has prayed for pre-arrest bail apprehending arrest in connection with Algapur P.S.Case No. 12/2015, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 71/2015 registered under Sections 120(B)/ 420/406 IPC read with Sections 3/7 of Banning Act, 1978.
Heard learned counsel Ms. R. Rongmei for the petitioner and learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State.
Case diary called for is received and perused.
The allegation made in the FIR is that the financial institution under the name and style “Kama India Project and Services Ltd.”, of which the three accused persons named in the FIR are the Chairman-cumDirectors and other top officials respectively. The said company through the accused named in the FIR collected
Page No.# 2/2
money from the people in the name of savings and when the turn came for returning the money on maturity, they removed their offices and fled away from the scene. Case diary transpires that the petitioner is the Chief Executive Officer of the said financial institution.
Having considered the nature of white colour economic offence and its impact on the common people and society, this Court does not consider the instant case to be a fit one for extending the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Hence, the prayer of pre-arrest bail stands rejected.
Send back the case diary.
The anticipatory bail application stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to grant pre-arrest bail to an accused facing charges of economic offences under Sections 120(B), 420, 406 IPC read with Banning Act, 1978.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SUBRATA PURKAYASTHA
THE STATE OF ASSAM
MIR ALFAZ ALI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
