Gauhati High Court
Manaranjan Wary And 5 Ors vs Page No. 2/4 on 25 August, 2020
Author: Manish Choudhury
Bench: Manish Choudhury
Page No. 1/4
GAHC010085702020
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB 1540/2020
1:MANARANJAN WARY AND 5 ORS.
S/O-RABINSON WARY, R/O. DHARMAPUR, PS AND PO- GOHPUR, PIN-
784168, DIST- BISWANATH(ASSAM)
2: BIJIDSHA BASUMATARY
S/O- ALEXISH BASUMATARY
R/O.-2 KADAMGURI
PS AND PO- GOHPUR
PIN-784168
DIST- BISWANATH(ASSAM)
3: VIJOY MASAHARY
S/O- UTTAM MASAHARY
R/O.- PURUBBAIGATE(WARD NO-6)
PS - GOHPUR
DIST- BISWANATH(ASSAM)
4: DURGA BORO
S/O- GIRISON BORO
R/O-2 JAMUKGURI
PS-GOHPUR
PIN- 784168
DIST- BISWANATH
ASSAM
5: GOPI BASUMATARY
S/O- JALMIM BASUMATARY
R/O-1 BORPUKHURI
PS - GOHPUR
PIN-784168
DIST- BISWANATH(ASSAM
VERSUS
Page No. 2/4
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP. BY PP ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R P HAZARIKA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
ORDER
Date : 25-08-2020 Heard Mr. R.P. Hazarika, learned counsel for the accused-petitioners and Ms. A. Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent, State of Assam.
2. By this application under Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) the accused-petitioners, viz. 1. Manaranjan Wary, 2. Bijidsha Basumatary, 3. Vijoy Masahary, 4. Durga Boro, 5. Gopi Basumatary and 6. Anil Biswakarma approached this Court seeking the benefit of pre-arrest bail, apprehending their arrest in connection with Gohpur Police Station Case no. 177/2020, registered under Sections 343/387, Indian Penal Code (IPC).
3. In the First Information Report (FIR) lodged on 13.05.2020, the informant has claimed to be a representative of the company, M/s DRB Infrastructure Private Limited, which is executing Itakola - Seijosa - Pakke Kesang road project. It is alleged that when 3 nos. of dumpers belonging to the company, were being taken to Banderdewa, they had been intercepted by the accused-petitioners with the assistance of drivers of those vehicles. It is alleged that the accused-petitioners had demanded money on 12.05.2020 by keeping the vehicles in their custody.
4. It is projected on behalf of the accused-petitioners that they were recruited by the company as workers and they had been working in the company for a number of months without been paid salaries in terms of their agreements with the company. In that respect, the accused-petitioners had made a representation before the Additional Deputy Page No. 3/4 Commissioner, Seijosa, Pakke Kesang on 07.04.2020. It is further submitted on behalf of the accused-petitioners that the dumpers in question were seized by the investigating authority on 14.05.2020. It is stated that they have been incorrectly projected as strangers in the FIR.
5. Pursuant to the interim order dated 23.06.2020, all the accused-petitioners have appeared before the Investigating Officer (I.O.) of the case and it is submitted that they have followed the conditions which have been imposed on them while granting interim relief of pre-arrest bail.
6. Ms. Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has endorsed the submission of the learned counsel for the accused-petitioners that pursuant to the interim order dated 23.06.2020, all the accused-petitioners have appeared before the I.O. of the case and after interrogation, the statements of the accused-petitioners have been duly recorded. They are also found to be co-operating with the investigation of the case.
7. Upon due consideration of the above fact situation and the versions projected on behalf of the parties, it transpires that the accused-petitioners are employees of the company in question and a dispute regarding pay had arose between them and the dumpers were found to be stopped by the accused-petitioners with regard to their claims for salaries. In such view of the matter, the custodial interrogation of the accused-petitioners are found not necessary, provided they continue to extend their cooperation in the further investigation of the case and their release on pre-arrest bail at the present stage of investigation, is not likely bring any prejudicial effect in the further investigation of the case.
8. Accordingly, the interim protection granted to the accused-petitioners by order dated 23.06.2020 is made absolute, subject to the conditions that :-
[1] the accused-petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation and make themselves available for interrogation whenever required by the Investigating Officer (I.O.) of the case;
[2] the accused-petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with the facts of the case so as to Page No. 4/4 dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer; [3] the accused-petitioners shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police; and [4] the accused-petitioners shall maintain law and order and they shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or of the commission of which they are suspected.
9. The application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Return the case diary.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant