Dismissed

Ritu Raj Gogoi and Anr. v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC8 Nov 2021AB/2799/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC in a case involving serious assault, grievous injury, and cheating. The Court observed grave allegations against the accused regarding the victim and interviewed witnesses. The petition was rejected as not a fit case for bail, vacating an earlier interim order.

What did the court decide?

The petition for pre-arrest bail was rejected. The earlier interim order was vacated.

Ritu Raj Gogoi and Anr. Vs the State of Assam — Anticipatory Bail | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010144322021

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/2799/2021

¶5

RITU RAJ GOGOI AND ANR. S/O SRI DAULAT GOGOI R/O VILL- RANGPURIA GAON P.O. SARBODAYA, P.S. LAHOWAL DIST. DIBRUGARH, ASSAM

¶6

2: ABANITA DUTTA GOGOI W/O SRI RITU RAJ GOGOI R/O VILL- RANGPURIA GAON

¶7

P.O. SARBODAYA

¶8

P.S. LAHOWAL DIST. DIBRUGARH ASSA

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR N N UPADHYAYA

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶13

Page No.# 2/3

¶14

:: BEFORE ::

¶15

HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

08.11.2021

¶18

By filing this petition under Section 438 of the CrPC, the petitioners, namely- (1) Ritu Raj Gogoi and (2) Abanita Dutta Gogoi have sought for prearrest bail in connection with Lahowal P.S. Case No.268/2021, registered under Section 365/325/448/354/294/153(A)/427/326/34 IPC.

¶19

Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the documents annexed including the Case Diary.

¶20

During the investigation, several witnesses have been examined and all of them have supported the allegation in the FIR that the accused persons assaulted the informant raising allegation of theft of text books and while his daughter along with other relatives went to rescue him from the clutches of the accused persons, they were also severely assaulted by the accused persons, as a result of which, the informant and his daughter sustained severe injuries on their person and the injury sustained by the daughter of the informant was grievous, for which she was admitted to the AMCH, Dibrugarh and she has been advised for neurosurgery OPD.

¶21

Further, from the statement of victims, the ingredients of Section 354/153(A) IPC was also attracted and the I/O contemplated to add Section 307 IPC. More importantly, the accused persons by way of force and threatening took their signature in the compromise deed which has no authenticity.

¶22

Page No.# 3/3

¶23

Considering all above, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail and accordingly the same stands rejected.

¶24

Interim order granted earlier stands vacated.

¶25

Return the Case Diary.

¶26

JUDGE

¶27

Comparing Assistant

Ritu Raj Gogoi and Anr. v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritu Raj Gogoi and Anr. 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

Pradip Chandra Deka Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Nazim Uddin @ Nazim Member Vs the State of Assam

Rakesh Kumar Paul Vs the State of Assam and 1 Anr.

Meher Banu Begum Vs the State of Assam

Nurul Islam and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Syed Makib Ali and 4 Ors. Vs the State of Assam