Allowed

Pratim Dowarah v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC11 Jun 2019AB/643/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner Pratim Dowarah applied for pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in an IPC case. The court observed the petitioner was cooperating with investigation, no adverse report existed, and no need for custodial interrogation. The interim anticipatory bail was made absolute subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail granted vide order dated 10.05.2019 is made absolute subject to conditions.

Pratim Dowarah Vs the State of Assam — Anticipatory Bail | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010047082019

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

¶4

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

¶5

Case No. : AB 643/2019

¶6

1:PRATIM DOWARAH

¶7

S/O GIRIDHAR DUWARAH, R/O VILLAGE KATHIATALI, P.S. GOLAGHAT, DIST.- GOLAGHAT, ASSAM, PIN-785625

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY P.P. ASSAM

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A NATH

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶12

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Date : 11-06-2019

¶15

Heard Mr. A. Nath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. A Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

¶16

By this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the petitioner, namely, Pratim Dowarah, has prayed for granting him pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Sonapur PS Case No. 98/2019 under Sections 406/420 of the IPC.

¶17

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

¶18

Mr. A Nath, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is on interim pre-arrest bail granted vide order, dated 10.05.2019, and that the petitioner appeared before

¶19

Page No.# 2/2

¶20

the I.O. and his statement under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. got recorded.

¶21

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 10.05.2019, the petitioner appeared before the I.O. and got his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.. The petitioner is co-operating in the investigation and there is no adverse report against the petitioner from the I.O. The case diary reveals no justifiable reason for custodial interrogation of the petitioner in the interest of further investigation of the case.

¶22

Therefore, the interim anticipatory bail granted in favour of the petitioner, vide order, dated 10.05.2019, is hereby made absolute, subject to the conditions (i) that the petitioner shall appear before the I.O. of the case as and when required for the purpose of investigation; (ii) that the petitioner shall not hamper or tamper with the investigation in any manner; and (iii) 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.

¶23

Return the case diary.

¶24

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

¶25

JUDGE

¶26

Comparing Assistant

Pratim Dowarah v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pratim Dowarah 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

Subham Jain Vs the State of Assam

Md. Nazir @ Nazir Ahmed Vs the State of Assam

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

Dipa Devi Chetry and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Palash Pratim Bora Vs the State of Assam

Ajit Das @ Petua Das Vs the State of Assam