Allowed

Safir Alom Laskar v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC1 Sept 2022AB/1788/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC, the Gauhati High Court disposed of the petition making an interim order absolute. The court held that custodial interrogation was unwarranted given the investigation progress and lack of availability of the applicant's statement in the case diary.

What did the court decide?

The interim anticipatory bail order dated 28.06.2022 was made absolute in the same terms and conditions; case diary returned.

Safir Alom Laskar Vs the State of Assam — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010126212022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/1788/2022

¶5

SAFIR ALOM LASKAR

¶6

S/O. LT. ABDUL WAHID LASKAR, VILL. JAMIRA BAGN BASTI, P.O. JAMIRA BAZAR,P.S. RAMNATHPUR, DIST. HAILAKANDI, ASSAM.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY PP, ASSAM

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S C BISWAS

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶11

BEFORE

¶12

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

01.09.2022.

¶15

Heard Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. K.K. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State respondent.

¶16

Page No.# 2/3

¶17

Apprehending arrest in connection with the Silchar P.S. Case No.2033/2020, under Sections 406/420 of the IPC, this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is preferred by accused/applicant, namely, Safir Alom Laskar, for grant of pre-arrest bail.

¶18

The said case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R., lodged by one Mehbub Hussain Barbhuiya on 01.07.2020, to the effect that accused Safir Alom Laskar has took possession of his one truck bearing Regn. No.STC 1613, by executing an notary affidavit at Silchar and as per the said agreement, the accused has to make payment of 7 numbers of installments due to the Bank and thereafter the documents of the vehicle would be transferred in his name. But after taking possession of the vehicle, the accused failed to make payment of the installments and in the meantime, Sreeram Finance has filed one case against him and then he paid Rs.80,000/- to the Finance Company and thereafter he demanded return of the vehicle but the accused did not respond and he served Advocate’s Notice upon the accused but the same failed to yield any result.

¶19

Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in pursuant to the order of this Court dated 28.06.2022, the applicant appeared before the I.O. and his statement is recorded and he is cooperating with the investigating agency and that no offence under Sections 406/420 of the IPC is made out, against the applicant as he had paid a sum of Rs.1 lac and copy of the receipt is enclosed with the present application as Annexure-3 (page No.20) and therefore, Mr. Biswas contended to make the interim order dated 28.06.2022 absolute, in the same terms and conditions.

¶20

On the other hand, producing the case diary, Mr. K.K. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam submits that the statement of the applicant is not

¶21

Page No.# 3/3

¶22

available in the case diary and that the case diary has not been updated since 10.12.2021. However, Mr. Das submits that in view of the progress of investigation, custodial interrogation of the applicant seems to be unwarranted here in this case.

¶23

Having heard the submission of learned Advocates of both sides, I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and also perused the Case Diary produced before this Court with the assistance of Mr. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

¶24

In view of the materials collected so far in the case diary as well as the progress of investigation and also considering the submission of learned Advocates of both sides, custodial interrogation of the petitioner seems to be unwarranted, in the interest of investigation of the case and accordingly, this Court is inclined to make the interim order, dated 28.06.2022, absolute in the same terms and conditions.

¶25

In terms of above, this anticipatory bail application stands disposed of.

¶26

The Case Diary be returned.

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

Comparing Assistant

Safir Alom Laskar v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Safir Alom Laskar 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

Rukiya Begam Vs Jul Hussain

Sobahanul Islam Choudhary Vs the State of Assam

Indrajit Bordoloi and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Rajdeep @ Rajdip Bhuyan Vs the State of Assam

Mukta Kalita @ Mukta Ram Kalita Vs the State of Assam

Gayatri Saikia Vs the State of Assam