Allowed

Jintu Das v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC2 Aug 2023AB/1531/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants the petitioner interim pre-arrest bail made absolute under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The court found no adverse report from the I.O. and held custody not necessary, imposing cooperation and non-interference conditions.

What did the court decide?

Interim pre-arrest bail was made absolute subject to conditions of cooperating with investigation and not inducing or threatening any person.

Jintu Das Vs the State of Assam — Anticipatory Bail | Gauhati HC (2023)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010090972023

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/1531/2023

¶5

JINTU DAS

¶6

S/O LAKHI DAS R/O BAM GAON P.S. SILAPATHAR DIST. DHEMAJI ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A B T HAQUE

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶11

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR ORDER

¶12

Date : 02.08.2023

¶13

Heard Mr. A. B. T. Haque, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also Heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State respondent.

¶14

This petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., is filed for granting the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, namely, Jintu Das , apprehending arrest in connection with Silapathar P.S. Case No. 50/2023 registered u/s 353/332/294/323 of the IPC, r/w Section 4 of the Assam Medicare Service Persons and Medicare Service Institutions (Prevention of Violence and Damage to Property) Act, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 139/2023.

¶15

Page No.# 2/2

¶16

The Case diary, as called for, is placed before the Court.

¶17

It may be mentioned that by order, dated 25.05.2023, this Court granted the privilege of interim pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

¶18

Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, submits that the case diary shows that the petitioner appeared before the Investigating Officer and got his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. as per the interim pre arrest bail granted earlier.

¶19

On perusal of the case diary, it is seen that there is no adverse report against the petitioner from the I.O., and, as such, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be necessary in the interest of the ongoing investigation into the case.

¶20

Therefore, the interim pre-arrest bail granted vide order, dated 25.05.2023 is hereby made absolute , subject to the following conditions-

¶21

(i) That the petitioner shall co-operate in investigation as and when required; and

¶22

(ii) That 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 the Court or to any police officer.

¶23

Return the case diary.

¶24

This disposes off the anticipatory bail application.

¶25

JUDGE

¶26

Comparing Assistant

Jintu Das v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jintu Das 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

Suleman Ali and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Johirul Islam Vs the State of Assam

Md. Sahab Uddin @ Mullah @ Rahim Vs the State of Assam

Sahab Uddin @ Sahabuddin Ali Vs the Union of India

Md. Taser Ali @ Salam Ali Vs the State of Assam

Abhijit Chetia Vs the State of Assam