Dismissed¶28

Tenzing Chukla v. The State of Ap

Gauhati HC3 Mar 2025AB/26/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gauhati High Court, Itanagar Bench; AB/26/2025 (GAHC040003272025); Tenzing Chukla v. State of AP; Mitali Thakuria, J.; order dated 04.03.2025; anticipatory bail; pre-arrest bail; Section 482 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023; BNS Sections 333, 155(2), 3(5), 140(3), 127; Section 3 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act 1984; Mechuka P.S. Case No. 01/2025; maintainability of second anticipatory bail application; same FIR; newly added sections; interim pre-arrest bail order dated 21.02.2025; AB Case No. 18/2025 fixed 07.03.2025; Pradeep Ram v. State of Jharkhand (2019) 17 SCC 326; petition dismissed as not maintainable.

What did the court decide?

The present petition is not maintainable at this stage and stands dismissed. ¶28

Tenzing Chukla Vs The State of Ap — Anticipatory Bail | Gauhati HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether the present application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking pre-arrest bail in respect of the newly added Sections 140(3)/127 BNS is maintainable when an earlier anticipatory bail application (AB Case No. 18/2025) arising out of the same FIR is already pending and the petitioner is enjoying interim pre-arrest bail.

¶27

Court's answer

The present petition is not maintainable at this stage and stands dismissed.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

The petition cannot be entertained at this stage because one anticipatory bail application is already pending before this Court for the same petitioner arising out of the same FIR, and the only reason for filing the present petition is the addition of two newly added sections.

¶28

Key takeaways

The petitioner will have the opportunity to raise the issue of the newly added sections before this Court while dealing with the earlier anticipatory bail application, AB Case No. 18/2025, which is fixed on 07.03.2025.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — Application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for pre-arrest bail in respect of newly added Sections 140(3)/127 BNS in Mechuka P.S. Case No. 01/2025 (Sections 333/155(2)/3(5)/140(3)/127 BNS read with Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984) — Held, not maintainable at this stage: an earlier anticipatory bail application (AB Case No. 18/2025) by the same petitioner arising out of the same FIR is already pending, the petitioner is enjoying interim pre-arrest bail granted by the Co-ordinate Bench on 21.02.2025, and the only reason for the present petition is the addition of two newly added sections; petitioner free to raise the newly added sections in the pending application fixed for 07.03.2025 — Petition dismissed. (Gauhati High Court, Itanagar Bench, Mitali Thakuria, J., 04.03.2025; Additional Public Prosecutor relied on Pradeep Ram vs. State of Jharkhand, (2019) 17 SCC 326.)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC040003272025

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/26/2025

¶5

Tenzing Chukla

¶6

Son of Shri Pema Chukla, Resident of Village Yorni, PO and PS Mechuka, Shi Yomi District, Arunachal Pradesh.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

The State of AP represented by the PP of AP

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : Mukesh Prasad, H.Dirchi,Jumnya Rina,S K Sharma

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP,

¶11

Page No.# 2/4

¶12

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER

¶13

04.03.2025

¶14

Heard Mr. S. K. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. T. Ete, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.

¶15

2. This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying for the grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused/petitioner in connection with Mechuka P.S. Case No. 01/2025, under Sections 333/ 155(2) /3(5)/ 140(3) /127 of the BNS, read with Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984.

¶16

3. During the course of the hearing, Mr. Ete, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submitted that one anticipatory bail application is already pending before this Court against the present petitioner arising out of the same FIR. In this regard, vide Order dated 21.02.2025, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court granted the privilege of interim pre-arrest bail to the present petitioner, fixing the same for the Case Diary on 07.03.2025. He further submitted that, solely based on the addition of certain sections, i.e., the newly added Sections 140(3)/127 of the BNS, the present petition has been filed seeking further protection from this Court, which is not at all maintainable. Moreover, on the strength of the order passed on 21.02.2025, the petitioner is currently enjoying the protection of interim pre-arrest bail. To date, no petition has been filed by the investigation agency or the prosecution for the arrest of the petitioner in connection with the newly added sections.

¶17

Page No.# 3/4

¶18

4. He further submitted that after obtaining the bail, if, any sections are added, the petitioner may approach the Court with a fresh application for bail for further protection. Accordingly, he relied on the decision passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pradeep Ram vs. The State of Jharkhand & Anr., reported in (2019) 17 SCC 326 , and emphasized paragraph 31 of the said judgment, which read as under:

¶19

In view of the foregoing discussions, we arrive at following conclusions in respect of a circumstance where after grant of bail to an accused, further cognizable and non-bailable offences are added:-

¶20

31.1. The accused can surrender and apply for bail for newly added cognizable and non-bailable offences. In event of refusal of bail, the accused can certainly be arrested.

¶21

31.2. The investigating agency can seek order from the court under Section 437(5) or 439(2) of Cr.P.C. for arrest of the accused and his custody.

¶22

31.3. The Court, in exercise of power under Section 437(5) or 439(2) of Cr.P.C., can direct for taking into custody the accused who has already been granted bail after cancellation of his bail. The Court in exercise of power under Section 437(5) as well as Section 439(2) can direct the person who has already been granted bail to be arrested and commit him to custody on addition of graver and non-cognizable offences which may not be necessary always with order of cancelling of earlier bail.

¶23

31.4. In a case where an accused has already been granted bail, the investigating authority on addition of an offence or offences may not proceed to arrest the accused, but for arresting the accused on such addition of offence or offences it need to obtain an order to arrest the accused from the Court which had granted the bail.

¶24

5. Therefore, Mr. Ete, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that this petition is not maintainable, as the subject matter of the connected anticipatory bail application [AB Case No.18/2025, which is fixed on 07.03.2025, is yet to be

¶25

Page No.# 4/4

¶26

decided.

¶27

6. In this context, Mr. Sharma, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that it is a fact that the present petition also arises out of the same FIR for the same petitioner. However, there is an apprehension of being arrested after the addition of the newly added sections, for which the present application has been filed. He further requests that the instant petition be tagged along with the earlier application [AB Case No. 18/2025], and that a necessary order be passed accordingly.

¶28

7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for both sides, as well as other aspects of the case, especially considering the fact that one anticipatory bail application is pending before this Court for the same petitioner arising out of the same FIR, and that the only reason for filing the present petition is the addition of two newly added sections, the present petition cannot be entertained at this stage. Further, the petitioner will have the opportunity to raise the issue before this Court while dealing with the earlier anticipatory bail application, numbered as AB Case No. 18/2025, which is already fixed on 07.03.2025. Accordingly, this petition is not maintainable, and the same stands dismissed.

¶29

8. In terms of the above, this anticipatory bail application stands disposed of.

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

Comparing Assistant

Tenzing Chukla v. The State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tenzing Chukla v. The State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ms Alang Rujuju and Anr. Vs The State of Ap

Smti Marbom Lollen @ Tana Nanu Vs The State of Ap

Smti Yanga Mara and Anr. Vs The State of Ap

Taniram Mingki and Anr. Vs The State of Ap

Techi Tukap Vs The State of Ap and Anr.

Shri Sinia Belo Vs Shri Meddak Lona