The Gauhati High Court disposed of an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC. The court found custodial interrogation unnecessary and converted interim bail into regular bail.
Interim pre-arrest bail order dated 23.1.2019 made absolute subject to cooperation, non-interference, and non-tampering conditions.
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
GAHC010012952019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB 162/2019
1:AJOY SINGH AND ANR. S/O LATE PRABHU NATH SINGH VILL- 1 NO. KOHORA, DIST GOLAGHAT, P.S. BOKAKHAT, PIN - 785609, ASSAM 2: SRI RITHON SAHA S/O LATE SHANTI SAHA VILL- 1 NO. KOHORA DIST. GOLAGHAT P.S. BOKAKHAT PIN - 785609 ASSA VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H K DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR
ORDER
Date : 15-05-2019
Heard Mr. HK Das, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. H. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam.
By this application filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C., the petitioners, namely Sri Ajoy Singh and Sri Rithon Saha have prayed for pre- arrest bail in connection with Rongmongwe P.S. Case No. 15/2018 (GR Case No. 1266/2018) registered under Sections 379/ 411/418/420 of the IPC read with Section 25 of the Assam Forest Regulation Act, 1891 .
Page No.# 2/2
Case diary, as called for, is placed before the court and perused.
Mr. HK Das, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are on interim pre-arrest bail granted vide order dated 23.1.2019 and they are cooperating in the investigation.
Mr. H. Sarma, learned Addl. PP, Assam submits that the petitioners are cooperating in the investigation and their statement under Section 161 of the Cr.PC. was recorded by the Investigating Officer and as such, their custodial interrogation may not be required in the interest of investigation.
On perusal of the case diary and upon hearing the learned counsels for both sides, this court finds that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary in the interest of the investigation.
Accordingly, the interim pre-arrest bail order, dated 23.1.2019, is hereby made absolute, subject to the conditions (i) that the petitioners shall co-operate in the investigation as and when required; (ii) that they shall not directly or indirectly hamper in the investigation or tamper with the evidence of the case; (iii) that they shall not directly or indirectly threat or induce any person acquainted with the facts of the case from disclosing such facts and circumstances to the police officer or to the court; and (iv) that they shall not commit any offence similar to the offence, the commission of which they are accused or suspected .
With the above directions, this anticipatory bail application is disposed of.
Return the case dairy.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the interim pre-arrest bail order should be made absolute.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Ajoy Singh and Anr
State of Assam
Ajit Borthakur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
