Allowed

Jogeswar Talukdar @ Jogesh Talukdar and 5 Ors. v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC16 Aug 2022AB/448/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the Gauhati High Court granted pre-arrest bail to petitioner no. 3 and made absolute interim bail for petitioners 4 to 6, citing insufficient grounds for custodial interrogation despite assault allegations.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail granted to petitioner no. 3 and petitioners 4 to 6 (interim made absolute) on a bond of Rs. 30,000/- with conditions to appear before the I.O. within seven days.

Jogeswar Talukdar @ Jogesh Talukdar and 5 Ors. Vs the… — Cheating and Forgery | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010027282022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/448/2022

¶5

JOGESWAR TALUKDAR @ JOGESH TALUKDAR AND 5 ORS S/O NABIN TALUKDAR R/O VILL- ANGARDHUA P.O. ANGARDHUA, P.S. BARAMA DIST. BAKSA, BTR, ASSAM

¶6

2: HITESH BAISHYA @ HITESHWAR BAISHYA S/O KRISHNA BAISHYA R/O VILL- ANGARDHUA P.O. ANGARDHUA

¶7

P.S. BARAMA DIST. BAKSA BTR ASSAM

¶8

3: RITU TALUKDAR @ RITU PRAKASH TALUKDAR S/O JOGESWAR TALUKDAR @ JOGESH TALUKDAR R/O VILL- ANGARDHUA P.O. ANGARDHUA

¶9

P.S. BARAMA DIST. BAKSA BTR ASSAM

¶10

4: PRANITA TALUKDAR W/O JOGESWAR TALUKDAR @ JOGESH TALUKDAR R/O VILL- ANGARDHUA P.O. ANGARDHUA

¶11

P.S. BARAMA DIST. BAKSA

¶12

Page No.# 2/5

¶13

BTR ASSAM

¶14

5: SABITA BAISHYA W/O LATE MAHESH BAISHYA R/O VILL- ANGARDHUA P.O. ANGARDHUA

¶15

P.S. BARAMA DIST. BAKSA BTR ASSAM

¶16

6: SUSHILYA BAISHYA W/O KRISHNA BAISHYA R/O VILL- ANGARDHUA P.O. ANGARDHUA

¶17

P.S. BARAMA DIST. BAKSA BTR ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶18

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R SARMA

¶19

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶20

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Date : 16.08.2022

¶23

Heard Mr. R. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned APP appearing for the State.

¶24

By this application under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the petitioners, namely, (1)

¶25

Page No.# 3/5

¶26

Jogeswar Talukdar @ Jogesh Talukdar, (2) Hitesh Baishya @ Hiteshwar Baishya, (3) Ritu Talukdar @ Ritu Prakash Talukdar, (4) Pranita Talukdar, (5) Sabita Baishya, and (6) Sushilya Baishya, are seeking pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Barama PS Case No.11/2022 under Sections 147/326/325/448/354 IPC.

¶27

The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 have already been arrested and therefore, this application is being pressed for petitioner nos. 3 to 6, out of which petitioner nos. 4, 5 and 6 had already been granted interim pre-arrest bail by order dated 16.02.2022.

¶28

The learned APP has produced the case diary and has opposed the prayer for bail on the ground that all the petitioners have participated in the assault of the informant and his family.

¶29

On a perusal of the case diary, it appears that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner nos. 3 to 6 of having participated in the assault of the informant and his family members. It also appears from the case diary that three victims have been examined by the medical officer and they had received simple injury with blunt weapon and one injured person was referred to the Gauhati Medical College and Hospital having suffered fracture injury on right leg. However, his medical report is not available.

¶30

Although, there are incriminating materials against the petitioner nos. 3 to 6 of having participated in the assault of the informant and his family members, however, as per the FIR, the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are accused of causing grievous injury to the brother of informant and they have both been arrested.

¶31

Under such circumstances, the Court is of the considered opinion that custodial interrogation of the petitioner nos. 3 to 6 is not warranted. Accordingly, the Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner no.3

¶32

Page No.# 4/5

¶33

named above by providing that in the event of his arrest in connection with the case aforementioned, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/-, with one suitable surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of arresting authority.

¶34

Moreover, the interim pre-arrest bail granted to the petitioner nos. 4, 5 and 6 named above, by order dated 16.02.2022 is made absolute on the same terms. In addition, the petitioner nos. 4 to 6 shall once again appear before the I/O within 7 (seven) days from today.

¶35

The pre-arrest bail is granted to the petitioner no. 3 on the following conditions:

¶36

(1) The petitioner shall make themselves available to the police or any other investigating agency or Court in the present case as and when require.

¶37

(2) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. He shall not, in any manner, try to overawe or influence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶38

(3) The petitioner shall not obstruct the smooth progress of the investigation/ trial.

¶39

(4) The petitioner shall not misuse their liberty in any manner.

¶40

(5) The petitioner shall not jump over the bail.

¶41

(1) The petitioner shall appear before the I.O. of Barama PS Case No.11/2022 within 7 (seven) days from today, failing

¶42

Page No.# 5/5

¶43

which the pre-arrest bail granted would lapse on the 8^th day from the date of the order.

¶44

This anticipatory bail application stands disposed of.

¶45

Return the case diary.

¶46

JUDGE

¶47

Comparing Assistant

Jogeswar Talukdar @ Jogesh Talukdar and 5 Ors. v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jogeswar Talukdar @ Jogesh Talukdar and 5 Ors. 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

Ratul Konwar Vs the State of Assam

Raifuddin Ahmed Vs the State of Assam

Raifuddin Ahmed Vs the State of Assam

Rose Uddin Ahmed @ Roujuddin Ahmed and 9 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Raju Ojah Vs the State of Assam

Aminul Hassan Barlaskar @ Aminul Haque Choudhury Vs the State of Assam