Dismissed

Smti Pompi Boruah v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC12 May 2024AB/995/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC by directing the applicant to appear before the inferior court by 28.05.2024 to seek regular bail in connection with a cheating case, extending the interim order until then.

What did the court decide?

The instant anticipatory bail application was dismissed with direction to apply for regular bail before the lower court; interim protection extended.

Smti Pompi Boruah Vs the State of Assam — Cheating and Forgery | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010075542024

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/995/2024

¶5

SMTI POMPI BORUAH

¶6

W/O LATE MANOJ SHAH, R/O WARD NO. 8, NEAR SADAR THANA, DISTNORTH LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B KAUSHIK

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶11

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER

¶12

13.05.2024

¶13

Heard Mr. S. Hazarika, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. B.B. Gogoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This application, under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is preferred by applicant namely, Smti. Pompi Boruah , who has been apprehending arrest in connection with North Lakhimpur P.S. Case No.

¶14

Page No.# 2/3

¶15

75/2024 , under Sections 406/420 of the IPC, for grant of pre-arrest bail.

¶16

3. It is to be noted here that the said case has been registered on the basis of an FIR lodged by the Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, North Lakhimpur Branch, on 28.03.2021. The essence of allegation made in the FIR is that on 18.03.2021, the Bank had erroneously credited a sum of Rs. 37,60,200/in the Savings Bank Account No. 641102010003481, maintained by the applicant in the Union Bank of India, North Lakhimpur Branch and thereafter, a request was made to the applicant for refunding the amount, but, the said amount had already been withdrawn by the applicant from the said account.

¶17

4. Mr. Hazarika, learned counsel for the applicant submits that this Court was pleased to grant interim protection to the applicant, vide order dated 10.04.2024, and pursuant to the said order, the applicant had appeared before the IO and cooperating with the investigating agency and therefore, it is contended to make the interim order dated 10.04.2024, absolute in the same terms and conditions.

¶18

5. On the other hand, Mr. Gogoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that he has not received the case diary, but he has the instruction that the I.O. has already completed investigation and laid Charge-Sheet against the applicant, under Sections 406/420 of the IPC, vide Charge-Sheet No. 68/2024, dated 30.04.2024.

¶19

6. In view of above, this Court is inclined to dispose of this anticipatory application by directing the applicant to appear before the learned court below on or before 28.05.2024, and to apply for regular bail and in event of filing such an application, the learned Court below shall consider the same in accordance with law.

¶20

Page No.# 3/3

¶21

7. Till then, the interim order dated 10.04.2024, stands extended.

¶22

JUDGE

¶23

Comparing Assistant

Smti Pompi Boruah v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smti Pompi Boruah 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

Abdur Rahim and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Iunuch Ali @ Eunuch Ali Vs the State of Assam

Putuli Deka and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Shashi Gupta Vs the State of Assam

Shalim Uddin Mozumder @ Dr. Salim Uddin Majumder Vs the State of Assam

Abhinandan Kakoty and Anr. Vs the State of Assam