The Gauhati High Court granted pre-arrest bail (anticipatory bail) to two petitioners under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case under the IPC, as material did not justify custodial interrogation.
Prayer for pre-arrest bail granted; release on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- each with a suitable surety.
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
GAHC010120072019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB 1638/2019
1:SMTI. SIBANI DAS AND ANR.
W/O BABUL DAS, R/O BORBARI MAJGAON, P.O.-BAMUNI, P.S.-SAMAGURI, DIST-NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN-781102
2: SMTI GOLAPI KALITA W/O LATE BANAMALI KALITA R/O BORBARI MAJGAON P.O.-BAMUNI P.S.-SAMAGURI DIST-NAGAON ASSAM PIN-78110
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S B SARMA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA
ORDER
Date : 02-09-2019
This is an application made under Section 438 Cr.P.C ., seeking pre-arrest bail by the petitioners, namely, 1. Smti Sibani Das and 2. Smti Golapi Kalita, apprehending arrest in connection with Samuguri Police Station Case No. 166 of 2019 , registered under Sections 448/325/323/354/302/328/34 of the IPC .
Page No.# 2/2
I have perused the petition including the copy of the FIR annexed therewith. The case diary produced, has been perused.
Heard Mr. S Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. NJ Dutta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State of Assam.
In view of the materials in the case diary does, particularly, the statement of one Arup Das, it appears that he had assaulted the deceased for which ultimately the deceased died. There is no implicating materials against the present petitioners justifying their custodial interrogation. Such being the position appearing from the case diary, the prayer for pre-arrest bail made by the petitioners aforementioned, is granted.
Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the petitioners, above named, in connection with the case aforementioned, they shall be released on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- each , with a suitable surety each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of arresting authority.
The direction for pre-arrest bail is subject to the conditions that the petitioners:
(a) shall appear before the Investigating of concerned Police Station, within seven days from today and shall co-operate with the investigation;
(b) shall not hamper with the investigation, or tamper with the evidence of the case;
(c) 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. The anticipatory bail application stands disposed of.
Return the case diary.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether petitioners entitled to pre-arrest bail despite apprehension of arrest in offences involving murder and assault.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Smti Sibani Das and Smti Golapi Kalita
The State of Assam
Hitesh Kumar Sarma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
