Dismissed

Rituraj Gayan v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC25 Nov 2019AB/1963/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order rejecting a petition for pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC. The petitioner faced allegations of torturing his father and forging his signature to withdraw bank funds after his death. The court denied bail, finding the allegations grave and unlikely to be summarized otherwise.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail petition rejected; interim order vacated; case diary returned.

Rituraj Gayan Vs the State of Assam — Cheating and Forgery | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010145532019

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

¶4

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

¶5

Case No. : AB 1963/2019

¶6

1:RITURAJ GAYAN

¶7

S/O LT. HARENDRA NATH GAYAN, R/O AMOLAPATTY, P.S.-NAGAON SADAR, DIST-NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN-782003 VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF ASSAM

¶8

REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A H KHANDAKAR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶10

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN

¶11

ORDER

¶12

Date : 25-11-2019

¶13

By filing this petition under Section 438 of the CrPC, petitioner, namely, Rituraj Gayan has sought for pre-arrest bail in connection with Nagaon P.S. Case No.1421/2019 under Sections 506/380 IPC.

¶14

Heard Mr. BM Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. TJ Mahanta, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. PP Dutta, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. N Kalita, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam.

¶15

Gone through the case diary produced before this Court.

¶16

Allegation has been made against the present petitioner that during the lifetime of his father, the petitioner tortured his father a lot and withdrawn various amounts from the bank account of his father even after his death which was known to other brother and sister-in-law of the accused and when they enquired, the accused denied the same and threatened his brother and sister-in-law. The sister-in-law of the accused subsequently, filed the FIR against

¶17

Page No.# 2/2

¶18

the accused person for his alleged conduct.

¶19

An affidavit-in-opposition has been filed by informant annexing the bank documents contending that the father of the petitioner died on 07.01.2019 and the petitioner withdrawn an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- on 03.01.2019 from the bank account of his father. After the death of his father, the petitioner again withdrawn an amount of Rs.2,10,000/- on 19.04.2019 and has also withdrawn another amount of Rs.25,000/- from the back account of deceased/father by forging his signature. Likewise on 01.03.2019 another amount of Rs.2,30,000/- was withdrawn from the bank account by forging his signature. Thus, it has been vehemently contended that the petitioner not only tortured his father during his lifetime but has also looted huge amount of money from the bank account of the deceased/father by forging the signature of the death person. The statement of bank account has been annexed vide annexure-3, 4 and 5.

¶20

Learned counsel for the informant has also drawn attention of this court that the father of both the parties even wrote a letter to the Health Minister regarding the desperate conduct of the petitioner towards his father and asking for help vide Annexure-2.

¶21

In reply to the said, the petitioner has submitted that the aforesaid cheques were given to him out of love and affection by his father during his lifetime which he has withdrawn for his various business purpose.

¶22

Undisputed fact as emerged that even after the death of the father, the petitioner withdrawn several amounts from the bank account of his father on 14.02.2019, 01.03.2019 and 19.04.2019. The accused made no denial to the same. The signature of the accused person has already been obtained for FSL examination and the result is not yet known.

¶23

Considering the entirety of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that it is not fit case to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail as sought for. Accordingly it is rejected.

¶24

Interim order passed earlier stands vacated.

¶25

Return the case diary.

¶26

JUDGE

¶27

Comparing Assistant

Rituraj Gayan v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rituraj Gayan 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

Habib Amin and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Bajuruddin and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Md. Maharuddin Ali Vs the State of Assam

Ratul Saikia Vs the State of Assam

Dikshit Gogoi Vs the State of Assam

Biren Chakraborty Vs the State of Assam