Allowed

Anup Bhuyan v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC24 Jul 2019AB/1102/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court allowed pre-arrest bail (anticipatory bail) to the petitioner in a Case No.75/2019 under Sections 406/420 IPC. The court held that the case diary material did not justify custodial interrogation for investigation, thus releasing the petitioner on conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail bond of Rs. 20,000 with one suitable surety; appear before IO within 15 days; no inducement towards witnesses.

Anup Bhuyan Vs the State of Assam — Cheating and Forgery | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010078482019

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

¶4

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

¶5

Case No. : AB 1102/2019

¶6

1:ANUP BHUYAN

¶7

S/O LATE HAREN BHUYAN, VILL-PANCHALI BASTI, P.O.-LANKA, P.S.LANKA, DIST-HOJAI, ASSAM, PIN-782442

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM

¶10

REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S CHAUHAN

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶13

BEFORE

¶14

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIR ALFAZ ALI

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Date : 24-07-2019

¶17

By this application under Section 438 Cr.PC, the petitioner, Sri Anup Bhuyan has prayed for pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Lanka P.S. Case No.75/2019 under Section 406/420 IPC.

¶18

Heard Mr. S. Chouhan, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. P.P. for the state respondent.

¶19

Case diary called for is received and perused.

¶20

The allegation made in the FIR was that the petitioner was working as sales executive

¶21

Page No.# 2/2

¶22

in Dragon Cement Industries Pvt. Ltd.. It was alleged in the FIR that the petitioner collected Rs. 90,00,000/- from various customers, but did not deposit the said amount with the company. When the informant asked him to deposit the money, the petitioner intimidated him.

¶23

The material in the case diary does not justify any necessity for custodial interrogation of the petitioner for the purpose of investigation of the case, and as such, the prayer for prearrest bail deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, it is hereby provided that, if the petitioner is arrested, he shall be released on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with one suitable surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority. The pre-arrest bail is subject to the following conditions.

¶24

The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days and cooperate with the investigation.

¶25

The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat 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.

¶26

The bail application is disposed of.

¶27

Return the case diary.

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Anup Bhuyan v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anup Bhuyan 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

Pabitra Kumar Gogoi Vs the State of Assam

Pintu Das Vs the State of Assam

Bishnu Prasad Vs the State of Assam

Aibuddin Ali and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Surjya Baruah and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Md. Yusuf Ali and Anr. Vs the State of Assam