Allowed

Mintu Boruah @ Mintu Baruah v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC12 Jun 2024AB/563/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC in a case arising from a quarrel between two women, with the petitioner alleged only as an instigator. The court found no materials against the petitioner in the case diary and granted pre-arrest bail on furnishing bail bond.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail: release on ₹25,000 bond with like surety if arrested in Dispur P.S. Case No.131/2024

Mintu Boruah @ Mintu Baruah Vs the State of Assam — Anticipatory Bail | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010043712024

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/563/2024

¶5

MINTU BORUAH @ MINTU BARUAH

¶6

SON OF HOMESWAR BORUAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- NO.3 KAKI, P.O.SANKARPUR, DISTRICT- NAGAON, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP ASSAM

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M DUTTA

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶11

:: BEFORE ::

¶12

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

13.06.2024

¶15

Heard the learned counsel Mr. A. Baruah appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam.

¶16

2. This is an application under Section 438 of the CrPC in respect of Dispur P.S. Case No.131/2024, registered under Sections 341/323/356/379/325/354B/427/342 of the Indian

¶17

Page No.# 2/2

¶18

Penal Code read with Section 67A of the Information Technology (as Amended) Act, 2008 (corresponding to G.R. No.924/2024).

¶19

3. The occurrence of this case is a quarrel between the two women. The present petitioner is the husband of one of those two women.

¶20

4. The other woman has alleged that this petitioner had instigated the other women to quarrel with her.

¶21

5. Therefore, on the basis of the FIR, police registered the case under the aforesaid sections.

¶22

6. The case diary reveals that there are no materials against the present petitioner. The case diary reveals that the petitioner was not even present at the time of occurrence. Therefore, he does not deserve to be detained in custody. Pre-arrest bail application of the petitioner is allowed.

¶23

7. It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest in connection with Dispur P.S. Case No.131/2024, registered under Sections 341/323/356/379/325/354B/427/342 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 67A of the Information Technology (as Amended) Act, 2008 (corresponding to G.R. No.924/2024), the petitioner, namely- Mintu Boruah @ Mintu Baruah, he shall be released on bail of ₹25,000/- with a surety of like amount to the satisfaction of arresting authority.

¶24

8. With the above direction, the application for bail is disposed of.

¶25

Case diary shall be returned.

¶26

JUDGE

¶27

Comparing Assistant

Mintu Boruah @ Mintu Baruah v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mintu Boruah @ Mintu Baruah 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

Biplab Baidya Vs the Union of India and Anr.

Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Pinki Das @ Saha and 4 Ors.

Md. Aliul Islam Vs Rina Medhi

Deben Nayak @ Prasanta Nayak Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Suresh Kumar Kashliwal Vs the State of Assam

MD Nabi Hussain and Anr. Vs the State of Assam