Allowed

Prasenjit Roy and Anr. v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC10 Jan 2019AB/3550/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court granted pre-arrest bail in a case concerning assault injuries. The court accepted the bail application as custodial detention was deemed unnecessary for the investigation, citing existing arrests of related individuals and lack of immediate threat.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners shall be released on bail on furnishing Rs. 20,000/- each with two local sureties, subject to conditions regarding appearance, jurisdiction, and witness interaction.

Prasenjit Roy and Anr. Vs the State of Assam — Anticipatory Bail | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010249232018

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB 3550/2018

¶5

1:PRASENJIT ROY AND ANR. S/O LATE PRABIN KUMAR ROY R/O BASISHANAGAR, BYE LANE-6, HOUSE NO. 6, P.S. BASISTHA, DIST. KAMRUP (METRO), ASSAM.

¶6

2: SRI SIDHARTHA ROY S/O LATE PRABIN KUMAR ROY R/O BASISTHANAGAR BYE LANE-6

¶7

HOUSE NO. 9

¶8

P.S. BASISTHA DIST.KAMRUP (METRO) ASSAM

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P N SHARMA

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶13

Page No.# 2/3

¶14

BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK

¶15

ORDER

¶16

10-01-2019

¶17

Heard Mr. D. K. Bhattacharyya, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. N. J. Dutta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶18

This application under Section 438 CrPC has been filed by the petitioners, namely, 1) Sri Prasenjit Roy and 2) Sri Sidhartha Roy seeking pre arrest bail in Basistha Police Station Case No.1368/2018, corresponding to G.R. No.15413/2018 registered under Sections 341/326/307/34 of the IPC.

¶19

Case diary produced today by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor reveals that there is an enmity between the family members of the petitioners and that of the victim and on the date of the incident i.e., on 16.10.2018, the petitioner along with his 2 brothers assaulted the victim due to which he sustained injuries and was admitted to Health Hospital for treatment.

¶20

The statement of the victim recorded by the concerned Investigating Officer reveals that it is Partha Pratim Roy the brother of the petitioners, who assaulted the victim by an iron rod on his head due to which he sustained hewad injuries whereas the petitioner only assaulted the said victim by hand.

¶21

The statement of the independent witnesses so far recorded by the concerned I/O of the case also reveals the same. Further said Partha Pratim Roy, brother of the petitioners who gave the blow on the head of the victim by iron rod was already arrested in the case on 18.10.2018 and since then he is custody.

¶22

Considering the above, this Court is of the view that custodial detention of the petitioners in said Basistha P.S. Case are not warranted so as to investigate the same and therefore, this pre arrest bail application of the petitioners is accepted.

¶23

Accordingly, in the event of arrest of the petitioners, named above, in connection with said Basistha Police Station Case No.1368/2018, they shall be released on bail on furnishing bail of Rs. 20,000/- each with two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of

¶24

Page No.# 3/3

¶25

the arresting authority subject to the conditions (i) that the petitioners shall appear before the concerned I.O. of said Basistha P.S. Case on or before 17.01.2019 and thereafter as and when they are required for necessary investigation of the said case; (ii) shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the Basistha P.S. without prior written permission of the concerned I.O. of the case; (iii) shall not threat or intimidate the witnesses of the case; (iv) shall not hamper or tamper any evidence of the case and shall co-operative with the Investigation Officer for necessary investigation of the aforesaid case.

¶26

Any violation of the aforesaid terms and conditions by the petitioners, named above, the bail hereby granted to them in Basistha Police Station Case No.1368/2018 shall stand automatically vacated.

¶27

Return the case diary.

¶28

Bail application is accordingly stands allowed.

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

Comparing Assistant

Prasenjit Roy and Anr. v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasenjit Roy and Anr. 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

Geeta Dey Vs the State of Assam

Chiranjib Talukdar and Anr. Vs Hiranmai Kalita and Anr.

Subhash Thousen Vs the State of Assam

Anuradha Dhar Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Karnendu Dhar Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Partha Pratim Roy Vs the State of Assam