Allowed¶21

Tame Tarang v. The State of Ap

Gauhati HC5 May 2025AB/51/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Pre-arrest bail; anticipatory bail; Section 482 BNSS 2023; Sections 115(2)/132 BNS; Nirjuli P.S. Case No. 34/2025; Tame Tarang (Shri Tame Tarang Tarh); State of AP; custodial interrogation not warranted; no inducement/threat/promise to witnesses; interim bail dated 25.04.2025 made absolute; Gauhati High Court Itanagar Bench; Arun Dev Choudhury, J.; decided 06.05.2025.

What did the court decide?

Interim pre-arrest bail granted vide order dated 25.04.2025 made absolute on the same terms and conditions. ¶21

Tame Tarang Vs The State of Ap — Anticipatory Bail | Gauhati HC (2025)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC040006302025

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/51/2025

¶5

Tame Tarang

¶6

Son of Shri Tame Tagam Tarh, a resident of E Sector, PO and PS Naharlagun, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

The State of AP represented by the PP of AP

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : Geken Ingo,

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP,

¶11

-BEFORE

¶12

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

¶13

06.05.2025

¶14

Heard Mr. G. Ingo, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. D. Loyi, learned Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶15

2. This is an application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 praying for privilege of pre-arrest bail to the accused/applicant, namely, Shri Tame Tarang Tarh in connection with Nirjuli P.S. Case No. 34/2025 under Sections 115 (2)/132 of BNS.

¶16

Page No.# 2/2

¶17

3. Considering the nature of allegations and facts and circumstances of the present case, the accused applicant was granted an interim protection from arrest with conditions amongst others that the accused applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of one week from 25.04.2025.

¶18

4. Perused the Case Diary.

¶19

5. It is seen from the Case Diary that the petitioner duly appeared before the Investigating Officer of the case and also recorded his statement. There are no materials on record to suggest any role of the petitioner directly or indirectly by making any inducement inasmuch as threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

¶20

6. Considering the matter in its entirety including the materials so far collected by the Investigating Officer of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that custodial interrogation of the accused applicant may not be warranted in the present case for the purpose of investigation.

¶21

7. Accordingly, the present bail application stands allowed by making the interim pre-arrest bail absolute granted vide order dated 25.04.2025 on the same terms and conditions.

¶22

JUDGE

¶23

Comparing Assistant

Tame Tarang v. The State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tame Tarang v. The State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Miss Leena Tallang Vs The State of Ap and Anr.

Takot Taggu Vs The State of Ap and Anr.

Tajen Yorpen and Anr. Vs The State of Ap

Sape Tala and 2 Ors. Vs The State of Ap

Tarh Tayang Vs The State of Ap and Anr.

Nyasam Jongsam Vs Tesam Pongte and 2 Ors.