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 5, Cited by 0]

Gauhati High Court

Ramen Saha vs The State Of Assam on 24 August, 2022

                                                                           Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010166392022




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

                                  Case No. : AB/2379/2022

            RAMEN SAHA
            S/O LATE UMESH CHANDRA SAHA, VILL-BAMANPARA, MANKACHAR,
            P.O. AND P.S.-MANKACHAR, DIST-SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR,
            ASSAM, PIN-783131



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM
            REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM



Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. M ISLAM

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM




                                  BEFORE
                 HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

                                          ORDER

Date : 24.8.2022 Heard Mr. HRA Choudhury, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. M. Islam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S. B. Hazarika, learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State respondent.

Page No.# 2/3 This is an application made under Section 438 Cr.P.C., seeking pre-arrest bail by the petitioner, namely, Ramen Saha apprehending arrest in connection with Excise Case No. 06/2022, registered u/s 53(1) (a) of the Assam Excise (amended) Act, 2018.

Section 53 (1) (a) provides that whoever in contravention of provision of Excise Act or any Rule or order made or notification issued or any license permit or pass granted under this Act, manufactures, imports, exports, transports, transits, removes, possesses or sells any intoxicate other than tari and pachwai is punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to three years and with fine etc. The allegation of the petitioner is that some IMFL has been recovered from his house and shop.

Considering the materials available on record and the provision of Section 48 and 49 Excise Act, this court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is entitled for privilege of interim pre-arrest bail.

Call for the case diary fixing 26.9.2022.

It is provided, in the interim, that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, above named, in connection with the case aforementioned, he shall be released on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- with a suitable surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of arresting authority.

The direction for pre-arrest bail is subject to the conditions that the petitioner:-

(a) shall appear before the Deputy Superintendent of Excise, South Salmara, Mankachar district, within seven days from today and shall co-operate with the investigation;

Page No.# 3/3

(b) shall not hamper with the investigation or tamper with the evidence of the case;

(c) shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, 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.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant