Allowed

Susanta Saha v. the State of Ap

Gauhati HC8 Aug 2022BA/75/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court, Itanagar Bench granted bail to the accused in a case under Section 406 IPC for misappropriation. The court held that further detention was unwarranted after 18 days in jail allowing sufficient time for initial investigation.

What did the court decide?

Accused enlarged on bail by furnishing bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate.

Susanta Saha Vs the State of Ap — Money Laundering | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC040009102022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : BA 75/2022

¶5

1:Susanta Saha S/o Lt. Sailen Chandra Saha, R/o Jagaharimura, Near Kalibari, PO College Tilla, Kalibari Road, Agartala, West Tripura

¶6

VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF AP Represented by the PP, A.P

¶7

Advocate for the Petitioner : M A Islam

¶8

Advocate for the Respondent : T. Ete, Addl. P P of AP

¶9

BEFORE

¶10

HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN

¶11

ORDER

¶12

08.08.2022

¶13

Heard Mr. M. A. Islam, learned counsel for the accused/ applicant. Also heard Mr. T. Ete, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.

¶14

This application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,

¶15

Page No.# 2/3

¶16

1973, is preferred by accused, namely, Shri Susanta Saha , who has been languishing in jail hazot in connection with Seppa P.S. Case No. 29/2022, under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code , for grant of bail.

¶17

It is to be mentioned here that Seppa P.S. Case No. 29/2022, under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code, has been registered on the basis of one F.I.R., lodged by one Shri Longsa Mangam on 28.05.2022, to the effect that Shri Susanta Saha, who was working as Manager of his shop, in the name and style of M/s Longsa Mangam Enterprise for last 6-7 years, ran away with a sum of Rs. 45 Lakhs from M/s Longsa Mangam Enterprise since 25.05.2022 and disconnected all his contact and connection link.

¶18

Mr. M. A. Islam, learned counsel for the accused/applicant, submits that the accused was arrested on 21.07.2022 and thereafter, he was remanded to police custody for 8 (eight) days and thereafter, he was remanded to jail hajot and since then, he is behind the bar for last 18 days. Mr. Islam further submits that during police custody, the accused was thoroughly interrogated and that the amount allegedly misappropriated by the accused is much lesser than the amount projected in the F.I.R. and that he will co-operate with the Investigating Agency and therefore, it is contended to allow the petition.

¶19

On the other hand, Mr. T. Ete, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, opposed the petition and contended to call for the Case Diary as the amount allegedly misappropriated by the accused is Rs. 45 Lakhs.

¶20

Page No.# 3/3

¶21

Having heard the submissions of learned Advocates of both sides, I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record. I find that this petition can be disposed of without perusing the Case Diary.

¶22

It appears that the accused was arrested on 21.07.2022, and he is behind the bar for last 18 days. It also appears that the case was registered on 30.05.2022, and since then the I.O. got sufficient time for investigation.

¶23

Considering the period of detention and also considering the submissions of learned Advocates of both sides, this Court is of the view that further custodial detention of the accused seems to be unwarranted in the interest of investigation.

¶24

Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 50,000/(Rupees fifty thousand) only with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seppa, the accused namely, Shri Susanta Saha , be enlarge on bail.

¶25

In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of.

¶26

JUDGE

¶27

Comparing Assistant

Susanta Saha v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Susanta Saha v. the State of Ap

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

Charu Punung @ Ponung Vs Charu Tamam

Charu Punung @ Ponung Vs Charu Tamam

Dadi Rimo and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Ap and Anr.

Jenlong Mophuk and Anr. Vs the State of Ap

Mithun Chakrawati Vs the State of Ap

Domin Lomi Vs Yommar Ingo and 8 Ors.