Single judge order allowing anticipatory bail application by Phassang Tayam. The court held custodial interrogation unnecessary and converted the interim order dated 11.02.2021 into an absolute order on the same conditions.
Anticipatory bail allowed; interim order dated 11.02.2021 made absolute on 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
GAHC040001442021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)
Case No. : AB 54/2021
1:Phassang Tayam
AGED ABOUT 23 YRS., RO NIRJULI, PO/PS NIRJULI DISTRICT PAPUM PARE, AP.
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF AP REPRESENTED THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.
Advocate for the Petitioner : Lissing Perme
Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP
BEFORE
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.K.MEDHI
ORDER
Date : 02-03-2021
Heard Shri L Perme, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Phassang Tayam, who has filed this anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC praying for pre-arrest bail in connection with Banderduwa PS Case No.05/2021 under Sections 448/354/326/365/294/ 355/342/506/34 of the IPC.
Shri Perme, learned counsel submits that pursuant to the order dated 11.02.2021, the petitioner is rendering full cooperation with the investigation and has also appeared before the IO.
Page No.# 2/2
Shri U Bori, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, AP has produced the Case Diary.
The medical report which forms a part of the Case Diary reflects that though the injuries sustained is of grievous nature, use of blunt object has been suggested. The injuries upon the husband of the informant are multiple abrasion of 2 x 3 cm and swelling of 2 x 3 cm in diameter.
Shri Perme, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant himself was not connected with the assault and it was on account of mob violence, the husband of the informant received such injuries against whom serious allegations were there.
After hearing the learned counsel for the applicant and taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained as well as the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that custodial interrogation of the applicant may not be necessary.
In that view of the matter, the instant anticipatory bail petition is allowed and the interim order passed on 11.02.2021 is hereby made absolute on the same terms and conditions imposed as mentioned in the order dated 11.02.2021.
The Case Diary is returned to the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, AP.
Petitioner is directed to keep on rendering full co-operation with the investigation and not to indulge in any activities detrimental to the same.
Bail application stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant in connection with the murder, rape, and related offences.
Whether custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary given the nature of injuries and facts of the case.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Phassang Tayam
The State of AP
S.K. Medhi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
