The Gauhati High Court considered an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC. The court rejected the prayer for Amalesh Talukdar due to prima facie materials but held the interim bail for Sobita Das absolute.
Bail denied to Amalesh Talukdar; interim bail made absolute for Sobita Das with directions to cooperate.
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
GAHC010105282022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/1499/2022
AMALESH TALUKDAR AND ANR S/O LT. AKAN TALUKDAR R/O BHABANIPUR P.S. BARPETA, P.O. BHABANIPUR DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN-781011
2: SOBITA DAS D/OLT. AKAN TALUKDAR R/O BHABANIPUR P.S. BARPETA P.O. BHABANIPUR DIST. BARPETA ASSAM PIN-78101 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. T N DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
ORDER
01.08.2022
Heard Shri T. N. Das, learned Counsel for the petitioners, namely, 1.Amalesh Talukdar and 2. Sobita Das, who have filed this anticipatory bail application under Section 438 of the Cr.PC praying for pre-arrest bail in connection with Mushalpur PS
Page No.# 2/2
Case No. 104/2021 under Sections 420/406/34 IPC.
This Court while calling for the Case Diary vide order dated 03.06.2022 had granted interim protections to the petitioners pursuant to which the petitioners had appeared before the IO and their statements have been recorded.
Shri Das, the learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are brothers and sisters and the sister is presently staying at Manipur with her husband. However, in the transaction, her account had to be used for making certain payments.
On the other hand, Shri K. K. Das, the learned Addl. PP, Assam by producing the Case Diary has submitted that there are prima facie materials against the petitioner No. 1. So far as petitioner No. 2 is concerned, though her bank account has been used, she may not be aware of the transaction as a signed cheque book was given to the petitioner No. 1 who is her brother.
After hearing and on perusal of the materials of the Case Diary, this Court is of the opinion that in view of the categorical finding in the Case Diary, grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner No. 1 , namely, Amalesh Talukdar is not warranted. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
However, so far as petitioner No. 2, namely, Sobita Das is concerned, the interim bail passed on 03.06.2022 is made absolute.
The petitioner No. 1, namely Sobita Das is directed to continue to render full cooperation with the investigation of the case and not to indulge in any activities detrimental to the same.
The bail application accordingly stands disposed of.
Return the Case Diary to the learned Addl. PP, Assam forthwith.
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to Petitioner No.1 for a prima facie offence.
Whether interim bail granted to Petitioner No.2 should be made absolute.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Amalesh Talukdar
Sobita Das
State of Assam
Sanjay Kumar Medhi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
