Dismissed

Abhijit Aich @ Bhola v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC9 Nov 2020AB/2917/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an order rejecting a pre-arrest bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The facts involve a stolen amount from a hotel room. The court held it was not a fit case to grant bail due to lack of specific evidence but high probability of implicating the accused. The application was accordingly dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail application rejected; case disposed of; case diary returned.

Abhijit Aich @ Bhola Vs the State of Assam — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Gauhati HC (2020)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010147882020

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/2917/2020

¶5

ABHIJIT AICH @ BHOLA

¶6

S/O. LT. AJIT KUMAR AICH, R/O. DOBOKA TOWN, WARD NO.2, P.O. AND P.S. DOBOKA, DIST. HOJAI, ASSAM, PIN-782440.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY PP, ASSAM.

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S DUTTA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶10

BEFORE

¶11

HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN

¶12

:: O R D E R ::

¶13

09-11-2020

¶14

This is an application made under Section 438 Cr.P.C ., seeking pre-arrest bail by the

¶15

petitioner, namely, Abhijit Aich @ Bhola in connection with Paltanbazar Police Station

¶16

Case No.731/2020 (Corresponding to GR No. 11522/2020), registered under Sections 328/380 of IPC.

¶17

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam also perused the case diary and the documents annexed.

¶18

The informant being known to the accused petitioner stayed together in a hotel at

¶19

Page No.# 2/2

¶20

Paltanbazar and at that time the informant carrying Rs. 6,75,000/- in his possession to purchase medicine (in wholesale). In the night after consuming alcohol, the petitioner offered cigarette and thereafter he turned unconscious. In the morning, the informant found himself alone in the room of the hotel and the money was missing from his bag and the room was locked from the outside. Although no specific evidence is found against the petitioner but all probability the accused is implicated for the commission of theft of money from the informant and the matter needs proper investigation.

¶21

Considering all entirety of the matter, this Court is of the view that it is not fit case to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

¶22

In terms of the above, this bail application stands disposed of.

¶23

Return the case diary.

¶24

JUDGE

¶25

Comparing Assistant

Abhijit Aich @ Bhola v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhijit Aich @ Bhola 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

National Insurance Company Limited Vs Musstt. Majeda Khatun and 6 Ors.

National Insurance Company Limited Vs Mustt. Bulbuli Khatun and 6 Ors.

Jamanur Ali Bepari Vs the State of Assam

Abu Sama Miya and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Sahidul Islam and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Riten Pathak Vs the State of Assam