Allowed

Rajiv Kumar Gupta v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC2 Feb 2023I.A.(Crl.)/38/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the petitioner's application to extend the deadline for appearing before the Investigating Officer under a pending Section 438 CrPC bail application, linking the extension to the next date for production of the case diary.

What did the court decide?

Interim protection under pending bail application extended until 06.02.2023; petitioner ordered to appear before I.O. on or before that date.

Rajiv Kumar Gupta Vs the State of Assam — Anticipatory Bail | Gauhati HC (2023)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010007252023

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/38/2023

¶5

RAJIV KUMAR GUPTA

¶6

S/O. LT. BISWANATH PRASAD, R/O. AZAD ROAD, DOOMDOOMA, P.O. AND P.S. DOOMDOOMA, DIST.TINSUKIA, ASSAM.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE P.P., ASSAM

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S ISLAM

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶11

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

¶12

ORDER

¶13

Date : 02-02-2023

¶14

Heard Mr. A. Hawari, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the opposite party.

¶15

The applicant as the petitioner has preferred a pre-arrest bail application under Section 438, CrPC and the same application has been

¶16

Page No.# 2/3

¶17

registered as A.B. no. 3493/2022. The application is pending as on date.

¶18

The applicant-petitioner has preferred the said application, A.B. no. 3493/2022 apprehending his arrest in connection with Doomdooma Police Station Case no. 335/2022, registered for offences punishable under Sections 147/148/149/448/325/395/427, Indian Penal Code.

¶19

When the application was moved on 25.11.2022, the parties were heard on the application including interim prayer. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegations made in the crime case, the petitioner was extended interim protection by order dated 25.11.2022 by observing that in the event of arrest of the applicant-petitioner in connection with Doomdooma Police Station Case no. 335/2022, he shall be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject inter alia to the condition that the applicant-petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer [I.O.] of the case within 10 [ten] days from 25.11.2022.

¶20

The instant interlocutory application has been preferred by the applicant-petitioner on the premise that due to reasons beyond his control, he could not comply with the aforesaid direction made in the order dated 25.11.2022, meaning thereby, he could not appear before the I.O. of the case within 10 [ten] days from 25.11.2022. By the interlocutory application, it has been prayed that the said period may be extended for a further period of 7 [seven] days to enable the applicant-petitioner to appear before the I.O. of the case. The applicant-petitioner has undertaken that he will appear before the I.O. of the case within 7 [seven] days from today without fail in the event the period of interim protection is extended for 7 [seven] days.

¶21

Page No.# 3/3

¶22

Mr. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that since the application, A.B. no. 3493/2022 is pending as on date for production of the case diary on 06.02.2023, the appearance of the applicant-petitioner before the I.O. of the case within 06.02.2023 will facilitate an expeditious investigation of the case.

¶23

Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that the prayer made in this interlocutory application deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, it is observed that since the bail application, A.B. no. 3493/2022 is ordered to be listed on 06.02.2023, the interim protection granted to the petitioner in A.B. no. 3493/2022 by order dated 25.11.2022 is extended till 06.02.2023 and the petitioner shall appear before the I.O. of the case on or before 06.02.2023. It is further observed that in the event of non-appearance of the petitioner before the I.O. of the case on or before 06.02.2023, the interim protection granted to the petitioner will cease to have effect.

¶24

The interlocutory application stands accordingly disposed of.

¶25

JUDGE

¶26

Comparing Assistant

Rajiv Kumar Gupta v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajiv Kumar Gupta 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

Rajib Barooah Vs Secretary Cum P.F. Commissioner, and 3 Ors.

Majibar Rahman Vs the State of Assam

Nabin Chandra Sarma Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors. .

Keshab Chandra Baruah Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Abdul Siddik and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Md. Jonab Ali Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.