The Gauhati High Court disposed of an anticipatory bail application. Noting that the petitioner fired blanks at a roof without pointing at any human being, the court held custodial interrogation was unnecessary and made the interim bail absolute.
Interim pre-arrest bail granted vide order dated 29.01.2021 was made absolute on the same terms and conditions.
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
GAHC010012092021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/213/2021
JATIN SAIKIA
S/O- SRI BHUGESWAR SAIKIA, R/O- BOWALGURI, BAGOLIJAN, P.O. AND P.S. NORTH LAKHIMPUR, DIST.- NORTH LKHIMPUR, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY P.P., ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B GOGOI
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
B E F O R E
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA
02-03-2021
This is an application, filed under Section 438 of the Cr.PC. seeking pre-arrest bail of the accused-petitioner, namely, Sri Jatin Saikia, in connection with North Lakhimpur P.S. Case No.14/2021 (G.R. Case No.23/2021) registered under Sections 447/427/294/506 of the Indian Penal Code, read with Section 27(1) of the Arms Act, 1959.
Heard Mr. B. Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing on behalf of the State Respondent.
Page No.# 2/2
Case diary produced has been perused.
It appears from the materials in the case diary that the petitioner had carried the licensed gun and had blank fired 4/5 bullets on the roof. Of-course, the materials in the case diary do not disclose that the bullets fired were pointed at any human being, rather it is stated in the FIR that the bullets were fired only at the roof of the house. After the interim bail was granted, the petitioner had appeared before the investigating police officer and his statement has also been recorded.
Considering such facts, in the considered view of this Court, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not essential for the purpose of investigation of the case.
Therefore, the interim pre-arrest bail granted vide order dated 29.01.2021 is made absolute by this order on the same terms and conditions.
The anticipatory bail application, accordingly, stands disposed of.
Return the case diary.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the interim pre-arrest bail should be made absolute or quashed.
Whether custodial interrogation is essential for the investigation of the case.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Jatin Saikia
The State of Assam
Hitesh Kumar Sarma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
