This bail application seeking pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC was rejected. The court held that complicity was suggested and it was not a fit case to grant the privilege.
Bail application stands rejected. Interim order earlier passed is hereby vacated.
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
GAHC010021992022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/355/2022
DIPTI GOGOI
W/O DEBOJIT SONOWAL, R/O FLAT NO. 3B, DIDAR APARTMENT, L.N.B. PATH, HATIGAON, GUWAHATI, PIN-781038, KAMRUP (M), ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P MAHANTA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE
HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN ORDER
17.05.2022
By way of this bail application filed under Section 438 CrPC, petitioner, namely, Dipti Gogoi, has sought for pre-arrest bail in the event of her arrest in connection with Daboka PS Case No. 43/2022, under Sections 120(B)/384/409/420 IPC.
Heard the learned counsel for both the parties.
Also perused the record and the Case Diary.
Although the petitioner informed the Daboka Police about the extortion of money by one Lat Mandal, Sri Abdul Matil, in lieu of work, on account of which, the present FIR
Page No.# 2/2
has been filed, but during investigation, it is found that large number of witnesses from the office of the petitioner have implicated her that at her behest, the employees were forced, including the Lat Mandal, to collect the money against each NOC and the rate was fixed by her. It is stated that under such pressure, money was collected and subsequently, the share was distributed to all concerned, including the present petitioner. Some independent witnesses have also been examined, who have supported the allegations made.
Considering all entirety of the matter, where the complicity of the petitioner is also suggested, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to grant the privilege of prearrest bail to the petitioner and accordingly, her bail application stands rejected.
Interim order passed earlier is hereby vacated.
Return the Case Diary.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail in the event of arrest in the Daboka PS case under Sections 120(B)/384/409/420 IPC.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dipti Gogoi
The State of Assam
Rumi Kumari Phukan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
