Allowed

Suanta Bimal Das v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC17 May 2019AB/999/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court considered an application for pre-arrest bail. Finding the petitioner cooperative and the investigation complete, the court made the interim anticipatory bail from April 2, 2019, absolute, subject to standard conditions regarding investigation appearance and non-tampering.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail granted vide order dated 02.04.2019 made absolute subject to conditions of appearing before IO and not tampering with investigation.

Suanta Bimal Das Vs the State of Assam — Cheating and Forgery | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010069252019

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

¶4

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

¶5

Case No. : AB 999/2019

¶6

1:SUANTA BIMAL DAS

¶7

S/O LATE GOURANGA MOHAN DAS, R/O VILL-MEDHICHUBURI, P.O.KEHERUKHUNDA AND P.S.-DHEKIAJULI, DIST-SONITPRU, PIN-784001

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM

¶10

REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R M DAS

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶13

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Date : 17-05-2019

¶16

Heard Mr. R.M Das learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. S.H. Borah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

¶17

By this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the petitioner, namely, Susanta Bimal Das, has prayed for granting him pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Moirabari PS Case No. 15/19 under Sections 420, 468, 406, 417 of the IPC.

¶18

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

¶19

Mr. R.M Das, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is on interim pre-arrest bail granted vide order, dated 02.04.2019, and that the petitioner appeared before

¶20

Page No.# 2/2

¶21

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

¶22

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 02.04.2019, 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.

¶23

Therefore, the interim anticipatory bail granted in favour of the petitioner, vide order, dated 02.04.2019, 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; (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.

¶24

Return the case diary.

¶25

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

¶26

JUDGE

¶27

Comparing Assistant

Suanta Bimal Das v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suanta Bimal Das 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

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

Guneswar Timung and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Ranjit Kumar Roy Vs the State of Assam

Monirul Islam Vs the State of Assam