Dismissed¶25

Rana Baruah v. the State of Assam

Pre-arrest bail – Section 482 BNSS, 2023

Gauhati HC3 Mar 2025AB/173/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Rana Baruah v. State of Assam, AB/173/2025, Gauhati High Court (2025:GAU-AS:2219), Manash Ranjan Pathak, J., decided 04/03/2025. Pre-arrest bail application under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 rejected in Tinsukia P.S. Case No. 439/2024 registered under Sections 61(2)/316(2)/318(4)/336(3)/340(2) BNS. Case diary disclosed the petitioner's central role in the Rs. 70,00,000/- bank draft matter of EJJ Construction Company, Chennai involving purported Forest Department, Arunachal Pradesh contracts; sufficient incriminating materials found against the petitioner; case diary directed to be returned. No precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

Sufficient incriminating materials were found in the case diary against the petitioner with regard to his involvement in the alleged crime. ¶23

Rana Baruah Vs the State of Assam — Cheating and Forgery | Gauhati HC (2025)

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010014862025

2025:GAU-AS:2219

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

¶5

Case No. : AB/173/2025

¶6

RANA BARUAH S/O RATNA BARUAH R/O 1 NO. DAULASHAL P.S.MUKALMUA DIST. NALBARI, ASSAM PIN CODE-781312

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S NATH, MR P K KALITA,MS. J GHOSH

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

¶11

Page No.# 2/3

¶12

BEFORE

¶13

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK

¶14

04/03/2025

¶15

Heard Mr. S Nath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K K Parashar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State respondent.

¶16

2. The petitioner, namely, Sri Rana Baruah, son of Ratna Baruah, resident of 1 No. Daulashal, P.S. Mukalmua, District-Nalbari, has filed this application on 27.01.2025 under Section 482 BNSS, 2023, seeking pre-arrest bail apprehending his arrest in Tinsukia P.S. Case No. 439/2024 registered under Sections 61(2)/316(2)/318(4)/336(3)/340(2) BNS.

¶17

3. The petitioner alleged that the informant is the main culprit, who has dealt with one accused Jitendra Verma and has handed over the bank draft amounting to Rs. 70,00,000/- of the EJJ Construction Company, Chennai to said Verma and only to save himself, he has now lodged the FIR of the case.

¶18

4. It is submitted by the petitioner that nothing has been recovered from his possession except certain photo copies of cheques and other documents. He also stated that no bank transaction took place with his bank account pertaining to any share of said Rs.70,00,000/- involved in this case. As such, he has prayed for his pre-arrest bail in said Tinsukia P.S. Case No. 439/2024.

¶19

5. From the FIR of the case as well as the case diary, it can be seen that it is the present petitioner, who first disclosed that there are certain contracts of Forest Department, Arunachal Pradesh and he himself stated that he has close contact with high officials of the said department. As the informant’s company was interested for obtaining certain contracts from the Forest Department of Arunachal Pradesh so as to look after certain plantations in the Forest Department of Arunachal Pradesh, the petitioner led the informant and the official of informant’s company to Dibrugarh and it is the petitioner who informed the concerned officials of the informant’s company as well as the informant about the date and venue of the meeting to be held with the officials of the Forest Department of Arunachal Pradesh stating that the Chief Conservator of Forest, Arunachal Pradesh shall attend the said meeting.

¶20

6. Case diary also discloses that it is the petitioner who informed the official of the informant’s company as well as the informant that along with their applications, they have to deposit

¶21

Page No.# 3/3

¶22

Rs.70,00,000/- by way of bank draft and it is the petitioner who brought one person as an officer of the Forest Department of Arunachal Pradesh.

¶23

7. Finding sufficient incriminating materials in the case diary against the petitioner with regard to his involvement in the alleged crime, the Court is of the view that it is not a fit case to grant prearrest bail to the petitioner, Sri Rana Baruah in said Tinsukia P.S. Case No. 439/2024 .

¶24

8. Accordingly, this pre-arrest bail application of the petitioner, Sri Rana Baruah, son of Ratna

¶25

Baruah, in said Tinsukia P.S. Case No. 439/2024 stands rejected .

¶26

9. Return the case diary.

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

Comparing Assistant

Rana Baruah v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rana Baruah v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nur Alam Mondal@ Nur Alom Mandal, Vs the State of Assam

Abu Tahir Vs the State of Assam

Dipanjan Nath Vs the State of Assam

Hmingtei Hawncheu Zohmingmawie Vs the State of Assam

Palakh Das Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Sri Lakhinath Chiring Vs the State of Assam and Anr.