Allowed

Kushal Bhagawati v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC9 Aug 2022AB/226/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court granted pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, Deputy Advisor of Gaon Rakhi Bahini, who was not originally named in the FIR but was mentioned in the accused's statement. The court held that custodial interrogation was unnecessary as the petitioner had already appeared before the Investigating Officer and his continued cooperation would aid the investigation without causing adver

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail granted; interim protection made absolute subject to cooperation with investigation and conditions against inducement, obstruction, or mischief with evidence.

Kushal Bhagawati Vs the State of Assam — Anticipatory Bail | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010013882022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/226/2022

¶5

KUSHAL BHAGAWATI

¶6

SON OF LATE SARAT BHAGAWATI

¶7

R/O VILL- BAMGAON, P.S. BISWANATH CHARIALI, DIST. BISWANATH CHARIALI-784176, ASSAM, PH. 86381-82982

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N ALAM

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶12

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

¶13

ORDER

¶14

09.08.2022

¶15

Heard Mr. J. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State of Assam.

¶16

By this application under Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [CrPC], the petitioner viz. Sri Kushal Bhagawati has prayed for pre-arrest bail, apprehending his arrest, in connection

¶17

Page No.# 2/3

¶18

with Behali Police Station Case no. 05/2022, registered under Sections 120B/420/384/34 of Indian Penal Code [IPC].

¶19

In the First Information Report [FIR], the informant - Sri Mridul Bora had arraigned one Sri Nipon Bora as the accused who is the Chakra Sangathok of Gaon Rakhi Bahini, Behali, Biswanath and Gohpur. It is the allegation of the informant that the accused person along with some of his associates, demanded and took an amount of Rs. 7,000/- from the informant on 24.11.2021 with the assurance to appoint him in the Gaon Rakhi Bahini which was to be newly constituted. The said amount was stated to be transferred by the informant to a bank account number given by the accused. After receiving the said amount, the accused person and his associates appointed the informant as the General Secretary of the Gaon Rakhi Bahini, Village – Borjuli. The informant had further alleged that the accused person, in an illegal manner and by intimidation, had extorted a huge amount of money from other persons also on the assurance to give appointments in a number of Gaon Rakhi Bahinis.

¶20

Mr. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR filed by the informant. The petitioner is the Deputy Advisor of a Gaon Rakhi Bahini which works under the supervision of Superintendent of Police, Biswanath Chariali.

¶21

Mr. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor who has received the concerned case diary, has submitted that in the statement of the accused person viz. Sri Nipon Bora, the said accused person has mentioned the name of the petitioner. But the materials in the case diary do not reflect that any amount was taken by the petitioner from the informant directly.

¶22

It is revealed from the case diary that pursuant to the order dated 01.02.2022, the petitioner has appeared before the Investigating Officer of the case.

¶23

Having regard to the allegations made in the FIR; the facts that there occurred no direct transaction of money between the petitioner and the informant; and that the petitioner has appeared before the Investigating Officer of the case, meaning thereby, he has joined the investigation, this Court is of the considered view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner for the purpose of further investigation of the case is not necessary and his release on pre-arrest bail,

¶24

Page No.# 3/3

¶25

at this stage of investigation, is unlikely to cause any adverse effect in the further investigation of the case, provided he continues to extend his assistance and co-operation in the further investigation of the case.

¶26

Accordingly, the interim protection granted to the petitioner by order dated 01.02.2022 is made absolute, subject to the following conditions:-

¶27

[i] the petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required by the Investigating Officer [I.O.] of the case;

¶28

[ii] 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; and

¶29

[iii] the petitioner shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police.

¶30

The bail application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶31

JUDGE

¶32

Comparing Assistant

Kushal Bhagawati v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kushal Bhagawati 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

Md. Nur Alom Sheikh Vs Md. Abdul Kuddush Sk. and 2 Ors.

Baharul Islam Vs the State of Assam

Pramananda Deori Vs the State of Assam

Tajmohal and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Sukur Ali and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Johura Khanam Choudhury Vs the State of Assam