Allowed

Guneswar Timung and Anr. v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC17 May 2019AB/359/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in connection with IPC 409/420 charges. The court, noting cooperation with investigation and lack of adverse IO report, made the interim bail absolute with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail application made absolute subject to standard conditions including appearance before IO and non-interference in investigation.

Guneswar Timung and Anr. Vs the State of Assam — Cheating and Forgery | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010028872019

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB 359/2019

¶5

1:GUNESWAR TIMUNG AND ANR. S/O. LT. SOMBAR TIMUNG, R/O. VILL. RONGMON JIR, DIPHU, P.S. DIPHU, P.O. DIPHU, DIST. KARBI ANGLANG, ASSAM.

¶6

2: DEVANAND ENGTI @ DIVANANDO ENGTI

¶7

S/O. LT. BURA INGTI R/O. VILL. BURAGOHAIN P.S. HOWRAGHAT DIST. KARBI ANGLANG ASSAM VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY PP, ASSAM.

¶8

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P P DUTTA

¶9

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶10

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR

¶11

ORDER

¶12

Date : 17-05-2019

¶13

Heard Mr. PP Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. NJ Dutta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

¶14

By this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the petitioners, namely, 1.Guneswar Timung and 2. Devanand Engti @ Divanando Engti have prayed for granting them pre-

¶15

Page No.# 2/2

¶16

arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Dokmoka PS Case No. 09 of 2018 under Section 409/420 of the IPC.

¶17

Case diary, as called for, is placed before the Court.

¶18

Mr. PP Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are on interim pre-arrest bail granted vide order, dated 05.03.2019, and that the petitioners appeared before the I.O. and their statements under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. got recorded.

¶19

On perusal of the case diary, it is noticed that in terms of the conditions of the interim pre-arrest bail granted vide order, dated 05.03.2019, the petitioners appeared before the I.O. and got their statements recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C.. The petitioners are co-operating in the investigation and there is no adverse report against the petitioners from the I.O. The case diary reveals no justifiable reason for custodial interrogation of the petitioners in the interest of further investigation of the case.

¶20

Therefore, the interim anticipatory bail granted in favour of the petitioners, vide order, dated 05.03.2019, is hereby made absolute, subject to the conditions (i) that the petitioners shall appear before the I.O. of the case as and when required for the purpose of investigation; (ii) that the petitioners shall not hamper or tamper with the investigation in any manner; (iii) that the petitioners 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.

¶21

Return the case diary.

¶22

With the above directions, the anticipatory bail application stands disposed of.

¶23

JUDGE

¶24

Comparing Assistant

Guneswar Timung and Anr. v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guneswar Timung 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

Monsur Ali @ Monisur Rahman Vs the State of Assam

Mongli Choudhury Vs the State of Assam

Hamidul Islam and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Ranjit Kumar Roy Vs the State of Assam

Monirul Islam Vs the State of Assam

Suanta Bimal Das Vs the State of Assam