The Gauhati High Court rejected the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.PC. The Court found cogent materials in the Case Diary and apprehended that the petitioner might misuse his liberty or tamper with evidence if granted bail.
Petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.PC rejected; Case Diary sent back.
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
GAHC010206962022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/3062/2022
RUHUL AMIN S/O IDRIS ALI VILL- SAWRACHARA GAON P.S. KALGACHIA DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R ALI
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
ORDER
Date : 16-11-2022
Heard Mr. H.A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned Addl. P.P. for the State of Assam.
The petitioner Ruhul Amin has filed an application under Section 438 Cr.PC with prayer
Page No.# 2/2
for bail in connection with Kalgachia P.S. Case No. 158/2022 u/s 489(C) IPC.
The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with this case because the police visited his house but could not find any incriminating materials from his house. At that time the petitioner was not at home and the police asked his family members to hand him over to the police. It is submitted that the petitioner is not involved in this case. He is not named in the FIR. He has prayed for anticipatory bail and has pledged to co-operate with the trial.
The learned Addl. P.P Mr. K.K. Parasar has raised serious objection against the petitioner. It is stated that the petitioner is deeply involved in this case. There are cogent materials in the Case Diary against him.
I have perused the Case Diary. The FIR unfolds that the informant had received a secret information that Raju Ahmed was about to release fake currency notes in the market. The informant then went to Raju Ahmed‘s house along with the police party and found 684 notes of fake Indian currency of the denomination of Rs. 500/-. During investigation Raju Ahmed was arrested. The statements of the co-accused as well as the statement of the witnesses were recorded. At this stage of investigation I would like to filter the allegations against the petitioner. It is apt to mention at this juncture that there are cogent materials against the petitioner. There appears to be an apprehension that he may misuse his liberty if he is granted bail. Investigation may be adversely affected if the petitioner is enlarged on bail and there is possibility of tampering of evidence. I have also considered the gravity of the offence and the quantum of punishment prescribed. At this stage there appears to be no justified ground to extent the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Hence petition of prayer of pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is rejected at this stage.
Send back the Case Diary.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.PC.
Whether the petitioner has justified grounds to extend the privilege of anticipating arrest.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ruhul Amin
The State of Assam
Susmita Phukan Khaund
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
