Allowed

Subham Jain v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC10 Jun 2019AB/436/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Considered an application for pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in connection with IPC offences including Section 354-D. Found prima facie incriminating material but held custodial interrogation not warranted. Granted bail on Rs. 15,000 with conditions including compliance within seven days and avoiding inducing witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Granted pre-arrest bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 15,000 with one surety of like amount, subject to appearing before the Investigating Officer within seven days and not inducing any person to d

Subham Jain Vs the State of Assam — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010034392019

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB 436/2019

¶5

1:SUBHAM JAIN

¶6

S/O SHRI MAHESH KUMAR JAIN, R/O A-201 RISHAB RESIDENCY VASHA, DIST. SURAT, 395003, GUJARAT

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

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

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR K K GOSWAMI

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶11

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR

¶12

ORDER

¶13

Date : 10-06-2019

¶14

Heard Mr. S Mitra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. H Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

¶15

By this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the petitioner, namely, Subham Jain has prayed for granting pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Barpeta PS Case No. 472 of 2018 under Section 354-D/500/384/506 of the IPC and 67 A of the IT Act.

¶16

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

¶17

Mr. S Mitra, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner and the alleged victim girl had a long love affair and they used to meet at different places of the

¶18

Page No.# 2/3

¶19

State. Mr. Mitra further submits that the informant tried to rebut their deep relationship that had developed between them during the years of their close intimacy and ultimately the FIR came to be lodged by her father.

¶20

Mr. H Sharma, learned Addl.P.P.,Assam, submits that the incident had crept in course of the relationship between the informant’s daughter and the petitioner that continued from 2018 and the victim was a major on the date of the alleged occurrence. Mr. Sharma further submits that from the various facts narrated in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., it appears that the relationship between them developed from the year 2015 and it continued till the victim rejected the petitioner and ultimately, the FIR came to be lodged by her guardian.

¶21

The allegation against the petitioner is that he posted some indecent photograph of the petitioner that went viral in the social media, namely, instagram and facebook through the petitioner’s mobile phone.

¶22

From the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., it appears that there is prima facie incriminating material against the petitioner. However, on consideration of the evidence, as a whole, so far collected by the I.O., this Court finds that custodial interrogation of the petitioner in the interest of investigation is not warranted.

¶23

Therefore, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, namely , Subham Jain, he shall be released on pre-arrest bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.15,000/- with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject, of course, to the following conditions:

¶24

(i) That the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 7 days; and

¶25

(ii) That the petitioner 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.

¶26

(iii) That the petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence, commission of which he is accused, or suspected.

¶27

Return the case diary.

¶28

Page No.# 3/3

¶29

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

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

Comparing Assistant

Subham Jain v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subham Jain 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

Head Constableb/Ex-S Sarbeswar Rabharetired Vs Sri Bhaskar Jyoti Mahanta, IPS

Pobitra Saikia and and 4 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Prabhat Ch. Das and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Md. Nazir @ Nazir Ahmed Vs the State of Assam

Abdul Hasib Ahmed @ Mufti Abdul Hasib Vs the State of Assam

Majaffar Ali @ Mujaffar Ali Vs the State of Assam