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

Biki Baruah @ Bibek Baruah vs The State Of Assam on 8 October, 2020

Author: Parthivjyoti Saikia

Bench: Parthivjyoti Saikia

                                                                                  Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010115552020




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

                                   Case No. : AB 2175/2020

            1:BIKI BARUAH @ BIBEK BARUAH
            S/O SRI SUNIL BARUAH, R/O MARGHERITA BUDDHA VIHAR ROAD, P.O.
            AND P.S.-MARGHERITA, DIST-TINSUKIA, ASSAM

            VERSUS

            1:THE STATE OF ASSAM
            REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. JYOTIRMOY ROY

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM




                                     BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA

                                           ORDER

Date : 08-10-2020 Heard Mr. J. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. H. Sharma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State of Assam.

The petitioner Biki Baruah @ Bibek Baruah has prayed for pre-arrest bail, u/s 438 of the Cr.P.C, in the matter of Margherita P.S. Case No. 221/2020, u/s 325/307 of IPC, read with Section 3 (iv) of the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

The petitioner himself is a Buddhist by religion. One Buddhist Monk has lodged an FIR alleging that on 24.07.2020, the petitioner had attempted to cause hurt to another Buddhist Monk with his motorcycle.

Page No.# 2/2 It is alleged that the petitioner has been creating trouble in the Buddhist Monastery.

From the material available in the record, it appears that there is a dispute going on between two factions of Buddhist Monks. The case diary does not reveal anything to show that the petitioner had further use abusive language to hurt the sentiment of other people. In my considered opinion, petitioner does not deserve to be detained in custody for the allegation brought against him. Therefore, pre-arrest bail prayer of the petitioner is allowed.

Accordingly, interim order passed on 22.09.2020 is hereby made absolute, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for.

The bail application stands disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant