Application seeking cancellation of pre-arrest bail for respondent No. 2. Court examined charge sheets alleging abuse and threats. Found no material to substantiate bail-conditions breach. Rejected prayer.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010181672018
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Crl.) 635/2018
1:SRI JAYPRAKASH BERNEWAL S/O- LATE KESHAB PRASHAD BERNEWAL, R/O- MOIRABARI, P.S.- MOIRABARI, DIST.- MORIGAON, ASSAM
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP. BY THE P.P., ASSAM
2:MD. SURHAB ALI S/O- LATE TURAB ALI R/O- WARD NO. 8 WEST MOIRABARI P.S.- MOIRABARI DIST.- MORIGAON ASSAM PIN- 78212
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S MUNIR
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA
ORDER
Date : 07-01-2020
Heard Mr. BK Das, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Mr. NJ Dutta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State. Also heard Mr. PP Dutta,
Page No.# 2/2
learned counsel for the respondent No. 2.
Perused the impugned order granting pre-arrest bail to the accused, dated 12.07.2018 in AB No. 2059/2018.
The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that there is a condition in the order granting pre-arrest bail to the accused that he has shall not temper with the evidence of the case or threaten the witnesses directly or indirectly. According to the learned counsel for the applicant, the accused-respondent No. 2 has been threatening the witnesses and to that effect some cases have been filed in the Police Station. The charge-sheet of some of such cases has been placed before this court during the course of hearing by the learned counsel for the applicant.
On examination of the charge-sheet, it does not appear to this court that any material has been found to substantiate the allegation although there is an allegation of abusing the applicant by the accused-respondent No. 2 and therefore, an offence under Section 294 of the IPC has been found and charge-sheeted.
Considering such facts as well as the nature of the allegation and the grounds on which the pre-arrest bail was granted, this court is not inclined to cancel the pre-arrest bail granted to the respondent No. 2 vide order, dated 12.07.2018 in AB No. 2059/2018.
Accordingly, the prayer stands rejected. This interlocutory application stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the pre-arrest bail granted to the respondent should be cancelled due to alleged threats against witnesses.
Jayprakash Bernewal
State of Assam
Md. Surhab Ali
Hitesh Kumar Sarma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
