Gauhati High Court
Rubu Saikia @ Malayaj vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 29 March, 2019
Author: Hitesh Kumar Sarma
Bench: Hitesh Kumar Sarma
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010068492019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln. 729/2019
1:RUBU SAIKIA @ MALAYAJ
S/O SRI ARUP SAIKIA,
RESIDENT OF JALUK GAON, PO AND PS AMGURI, DIST SIVASAGAR,
ASSAM, 785680
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.
REPRESENTED BY PP ASSAM
2:MR. SUNIL SAHORIA
S/O MOHAN SAHORIA
RESIDENT OF PURABANGLA
PS GOLAGHAT
DIST GOLAGHAT. ASSA M
Advocate for the Petitioner : MISS. M BORAH
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA
ORDER
Date : 29-03-2019 This is an application, filed under Section 439 Cr.PC, praying for bail of the accused- petitioner, namely, Sri Rubu Saikia @ Malayaj, in connection with Bokakhat PS Case No. 61/2019 under Sections 364(A) IPC.
Heard Ms. M. Borah, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner as well as Mr. N.J. Dutta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the state respondent. Perused the petition as well as the annexures furnished therewith. This court has granted bail to some of the co-accused in this case on their applications under Page No.# 2/2 Section 439 Cr.PC. Considering the materials placed before this court, as of now, and the period of detention for 30 days as on date, this court is of the view that further custodial detention of the accused-petitioner is not necessary in the interest of investigation of the case, and accordingly, his prayer is allowed.
The accused-petitioner is granted bail on his furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with one suitable surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M), Bokakhat, on the following conditions :
(1) The accused-petitioner shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M), Bokakhat, without prior written permission from the said learned court, (2) The accused-petitioner shall not hamper with the investigation, or tamper with the evidence of the case, and (3) The accused-petitioner 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.
The petition stands disposed of accordingly.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant