This single bench order rejected a petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC. The court held that the FIR and case diary revealed sufficient complicity in the alleged offence of robbery under Section 392 IPC, making it unfit to grant bail.
The anticipatory bail application stands rejected; the case diary is to be returned.
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
GAHC010064082022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/898/2022
GAUTAM SINGH S/O SRI OM PRAKASH SINGH R/O MARIGAON WARD NO. 3, PACHATIYA, PART-3, P.S. MORIGAON DIST. MARIGAON, ASSAM PIN-782105
VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. T DEURI
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
:: BEFORE ::
HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN
O R D E R
11.05.2022
By filing this petition under Section 438 of the CrPC, the petitioner, namely- Sri
Page No.# 2/2
Gautam Singh has sought for pre-arrest bail, in the event of his arrest, in connection with Nagaon P.S. Case No.332/2022, registered under Section 392 of the IPC.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam. Also, perused the case diary and the documents as furnished.
The FIR as well as the materials in the case diary so far collected, suggested sufficient complicity of the present accused petitioner that he by wearing a police uniform along with the driver of the vehicle bearing Registration No.AS 02AD 2640 hatched a conspiracy and looted away an amount of Rs.20,88,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakh Eighty Eight Thousand) from the informant while it was carried by him in the said vehicle.
In view of the apparent complicity of the accused petitioner with the offence alleged, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to grant privilege of prearrest bail. Accordingly, same stands rejected.
The anticipatory bail application stands disposed.
Return the case diary.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to grant pre-arrest bail in connection with the offence under Section 392 of the IPC.
Whether the FIR and case diary materials suggest sufficient complicity to deny pre-arrest bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Gautam Singh
The State of Assam
Rumi Kumari Phukan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
