Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Gauhati High Court

Bibek Raj Deka vs The State Of Assam on 8 March, 2021

Author: Rumi Kumari Phukan

Bench: Rumi Kumari Phukan

                                                                                 Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010021162021




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

                                   Case No. : AB/364/2021

            BIBEK RAJ DEKA
            S/O SUCHIL DEKA, R/O VILL-DONGABARI, P.S.-JAGIROAD, DIST-
            MORIGAON, ASSAM, PIN-782411

            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM
            REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D C BORAH
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM


                                         BEFORE
                 HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN

                                       :: O R D E R :

:

08-03-2021 This is an application made under Section 438 Cr.P.C., seeking pre-arrest bail by the petitioner, namely, Bibek Raj Deka in connection with Jagiroad PS Case No. 680/2020 (corresponding to GR No.4005/2020), registered under Sections 420/406 of IPC. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor also perused the case diary and the documents annexed.
The petitioner has been implicated by the complainant as well as the other witnesses that on the pretext of giving job he took Rs.6,00,000/- from the complainant (Debolina Deka) and her sister. The accused petitioner was pretending to have love affair with said Debolina, procured such money and provided fake engagement letter to her and her sister and thereby alleged to Page No.# 2/2 have cheated them. Informant, who is the Inspector of Post has now forwarded the complaint to examine the genuineness of those documents.
There being sufficient complicity of the accused petitioner with the offence alleged, this Court is of the opinion that it is not fit case to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
In terms of the above, this bail application stands disposed of. Return the case diary.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant