Allowed

Biswajit Bhattacharjee v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC13 Feb 2023AB/2870/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner whose interim order dated 28.09.2022 was made absolute. The court held custodial interrogation was unnecessary as the petitioner had already recorded his statement and no allegation of hampering evidence existed.

What did the court decide?

The interim order dated 28.09.2022 granting interim protection to the petitioner was made absolute subject to specific conditions regarding investigation, evidence, and appearance.

Biswajit Bhattacharjee Vs the State of Assam — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2023)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010198282022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/2870/2022

¶5

BISWAJIT BHATTACHARJEE S/O LATE PRAMESH BHATTACHARJEE R/O KALIBARI ROAD, DIBRUGARH WEST P.O., P.S. AND DIST. DIBRUGARH, ASSAM

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶8

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S ISLAM

¶9

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶10

BEFORE

¶11

THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY O R D E R

¶12

13. 02. 2023

¶13

Heard Mr. S Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. RJ Barua, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam.

¶14

By this application under Section 438 Cr.PC., the accused-petitioner, namely, Sri Biswajit Bhattacharjee, is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Dibrugarh Police

¶15

Page No.# 2/2

¶16

Station Case No. 476/2022 under Section 353/201 IPC read with Section 14/15 of the Assam Game and Betting Act, 1970.

¶17

Case diary produced is perused.

¶18

This court under its order dated 28.09.2022 granted the petitioner interim protection with condition that he shall appear before the Investigating Officer. Case diary reveals that the petitioner had appeared before the Investigating Officer and recorded his statement. Some co-accused also were arrested and were granted bail. There is no allegation of hampering the evidence by the accused.

¶19

Considering above and also considering the material so far collected, this court is of the opinion that custodial interrogation of the accused shall not be necessary for further investigation of the case.

¶20

Accordingly, the interim order passed on 28.09.2022 is made absolute subject to the conditions that:

¶21

(i) The accused-petitioner shall not hamper with the investigation, or tamper with the evidence of the case, and

¶22

(ii) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer of the above mentioned case as and when called for by the said Investigating Officer.

¶23

(iii) The petitioner shall not indulge in similar criminal activity.

¶24

This application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶25

JUDGE

¶26

Comparing Assistant

Biswajit Bhattacharjee v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biswajit Bhattacharjee 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

Tasso Tamin Vs the State of Ap and 3 Ors.

Khoda Budh Vs the State of Ap and 2 Ors.

Shivkant Mishra Vs the State of Ap and Anr.

Fujaiel Ahmed @ Rajib Ahmed Vs the State of Assam

Lucky Begum Laskar Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Debaranjan Doley Vs the State of Assam