Allowed

Sanjit Paul v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC8 Sept 2022AB/2183/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court disposed of an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC. Making an interim order absolute, the court granted bail to the petitioner subject to standard conditions regarding witness tampering, maintaining law and order, and cooperating in the trial.

What did the court decide?

Interim protection granted to the petitioner vide order dated 05.08.2022 is made absolute subject to conditions regarding witness tampering, maintaining law and order, and cooperating with the court.

Sanjit Paul Vs the State of Assam — Domestic Violence | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010153292022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/2183/2022

¶5

SANJIT PAUL S/O GOBINDA PAUL, R/O VILL- SANTINAGAR, P.O. BALADMARI IN THE DIST. OF GOALPARA, ASSAM

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE ADDL. PP, ASSAM

¶8

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H DAS

¶9

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶10

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

¶11

ORDER

¶12

08.09.2022

¶13

Heard Mr. H. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. N. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State of Assam.

¶14

By this application under Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [CrPC], the

¶15

Page No.# 2/3

¶16

petitioner viz. Sanjit Paul has approached this Court seeking the benefit of pre-arrest bail, apprehending his arrest, in connection with Biswanath Chariali Police Station Case no. 117/2020 registered under Sections 498A/379, Indian Penal Code [IPC].

¶17

The informant who is the wife of the petitioner, has lodged the First Information Report [FIR] on 24.04.2020. In the FIR, the informant has alleged that the petitioner, during the period of lockdown, had stolen the informant’s vehicle and thereafter, maintained no contact with her. Allegations are also made to the effect that the petitioner used to torture the informant mentally and physically by demanding dowry. Another allegation is made to the effect that the petitioner borrowed a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- from the sister of the informant.

¶18

It is submitted by Mr. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner that the car which was taken by the petitioner from the informant, to travel to one place for business purpose on 17.08.2020, had been returned to the informant 2 [two] days later. It is also submitted by him that pursuant to the interim order dated 05.08.2022, the petitioner appeared before the Investigating Officer [I.O.] of the case and his statement has been duly recorded by the I.O.

¶19

On the other hand, Ms. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that after completion of the investigation of the case, the I.O. has submitted a charge sheet under Section 173[2], CrPC vide Charge Sheet no. 81/2020 dated 30.06.2020.

¶20

Considering the fact that the investigation of the case has been completed with the submission of a charge sheet and the petitioner had joined in the concluded investigation by appearing before the I.O. during the pendency of the investigation, the interim protection granted to the petitioner vide order dated 05.08.2022, is made absolute, subject to the following conditions :-

¶21

[i] the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;

¶22

[ii] the petitioner shall maintain law and order and he shall not commit an offence similar

¶23

Page No.# 3/3

¶24

to the offence of which he is accused, or of the commission of which he is suspected; and [iii] the petitioner shall regularly remain present during the trial and co-operate the Court to complete the trial for the above offences, if charge sheeted in the case.

¶25

The bail application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶26

JUDGE

¶27

Comparing Assistant

Sanjit Paul v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjit Paul 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

Mohan Kumar Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Mrinmoy Lekharu Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Mrs. Ashima Devi Kalita and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gopesh Deka Vs Phul Kumari Deka

Mrs Bornali Dutta Changmai and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Seikh Sakib and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam