The Gauhati High Court allowed an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for pre-arrest bail. Finding that the case diary lacked incriminating material justifying custodial interrogation, the Court made the interim bail order absolute.
The petition for pre-arrest bail is allowed and the interim bail order dated 07.06.2019 is made absolute.
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
GAHC010126002019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB 1685/2019
1:PINTU DAS
S/O LATE LALIT DAS, VILL-JAMSED ALIs BUILDING, SANTIPUR, P.S.BHARALUMUKH, GUWAHATI-09, DIST-KAMRUP(M), ASSAM
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N UDDIN
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIR ALFAZ ALI
ORDER
Date : 23-07-2019
Heard Mr. N Uddin, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. H Sarma, learned Addl. PP, Assam.
This is an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner, namely, Pintu Das , praying for pre-arrest bail apprehending arrest in connection with Basistha PS Case No.1329/2018 , under Sections 406/420/468 IPC.
The petitioner was granted interim bail by order dated 07.06.2019 and he has been interrogated in the meantime.
Case diary called for is received and perused.
Page No.# 2/2
As per the allegation made in the FIR, the informant entered into an agreement with the present petitioner to sale two vehicles at a cost of Rs.42,00,000/- and pursuant to the said agreement, the petitioner paid Rs.13,00,000/- for the vehicle which was handed over to him along with the papers. However, subsequently, the petitioner failed to pay the remaining price and also violated the terms of agreement.
Case diary produced today does not reflect any incriminating materials justifying the necessity of custodial interrogation of the petitioner. Accordingly, this Court is of the view this is a fit case for extending the benefit of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly the petition for pre-arrest bail is allowed and the order dated 07.06.2019, granting interim bail to the petitioner is hereby made absolute under the same terms and conditions.
The pre-arrest bail application stands disposed off.
Send back the case diary.
J U D G E
Smita
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the present case is fit for extending the benefit of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.
Whether the case diary reflects any incriminating materials justifying custodial interrogation.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Pintu Das
The State of Assam
Mir Alfaz Ali
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
