Bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a cheating and forgery case. The court rejected the application, holding that sufficient incriminating material was collected and co-accused remained at large, making bail inapplicable.
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.# 1/3
GAHC010244702023
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Bail Appln./3925/2023
DEBANANDA SAIKIA S/O LATE DANDIRAM SAIKIA R/O VILL- URIAMPARA P.O. LIKHOK CHAPORI P.S. BIHPURIA DIST. LAKHIMPUR ASSAM
VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP ASSAM
-----------Advocate for : MR. R PHUKAN Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN
ORDER
Date : 07-11-2023
Heard Mr. R. Phukan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl.P.P. for the State respondent.
Page No.# 2/3
This application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is preferred by the accused, Debananda Saikia, who has been languishing in jail hajot since 13.10.2023, in connection with Bihpuria P. S. Case No. 181/2023, under Sections 420 /406 / 468/ 34 IPC, corresponding to G.R.Case No. 963/2023, for grant of bail.
The above noted case has been registered on the basis of an FIR lodged by one Minakhi Hazarika.
The essence of allegation, made in the FIR dated 10.10.2023 is that her own brother,Sri Munindra Hazarika and one Sri Debananda Saikia have received a sum of Rs.7,50,000/- from her for providing her a job of School Teacher, in a Government school and after some days of receiving the amount, they have handed over her one appointment letter and when she reported the Head Master of the said school for joining, she came to know that the appointment letter, so handed over to her, is a fake document prepared with forged seal and signature of the officials and thereafter, on being asked, the accused persons have failed to return the amount.
Mr. Phukan, learned counsel for the accused submits that the accused was arrested on 12.10.2023 and forwarded to jail hajot on 13.10.2023 and since then, he has been languishing in jail hajot and that the petitioner is no way connected with the offence alleged in the FIR and the informant herself committed the offence and the allegation made in the FIR is false and therefore, it is contended to allow the petition.
On the other hand, Mr. Sarma, learned Addl. P. P. has produced the case diary before this Court and submits that the I.O. has collected sufficient incriminating materials against the accused and investigation is going on and further detention of the accused is warranted to arrest the co accused person and therefore, Mr. Sarma, contended to dismiss the petition.
Page No.# 3/3
Having heard the submission of learned Advocates for both the parties and I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and also perused the case diary with the assistance of Mr. Sarma, learned Addl. P.P for the State respondent .
It appears that the I.O. has collected sufficient incriminating materials against the present accused. He has received the amount from the informant and allegedly he misappropriated amount and handed over fake appointment letter to the informant. Further it appears that the co accused are yet to be arrested. And having considered the above, this Court is of the view that this is not a fit case where the privilege of bail can be extended to the accused, and accordingly, the petition stands dismissed.
Case diary be returned.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a cheating and forgery case despite a pending investigation against co-accused.
Whether the available evidence warrants detention of the accused to arrest co-accused.
If the petition for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. should be dismissed.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Debananda Saikia
The State of Assam
Robin Phukan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
