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

Jajneswar Rajkhowa And Anr vs The State Of Assam on 12 June, 2019

Author: Ajit Borthakur

Bench: Ajit Borthakur

                                                                                 Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010038882019




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

                                   Case No. : AB 512/2019

            1:JAJNESWAR RAJKHOWA AND ANR.
            S/O KHARGESWAR RAJKHOWA
            R/O LTG-3 (B), SECRETARIAT COMPLEX, RUKMINIGAON,
             RANGA MANCHA PATH, P.S. DISPUR, DIST. KAMRUP(M), ASSAM

            2: MD. SOHRABUDDIN AHMED
             S/O LATE KUTUBUDDIN AHMED
            NO. 2 SALBARI
             NOONMATI
             GUWAHATI-29
             P.O. AND P.S. NOONMATI
             DIST. KAMRUP (M)
            ASSA

            VERSUS

            1:THE STATE OF ASSAM
            REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. J I BORBHUIYA

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM




                                   BEFORE
                     HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR

                                          ORDER

Date : 12-06-2019 Heard Mr. J.J. Borbhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. N.J. Dutta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

Page No.# 2/2 By this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the petitioners, namely, 1. Jajneswar Rajkhowa and 2. Md. Sohrabuddin Ahmed, have prayed for granting them pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Panbazar PS Case No. 115/2019 under Sections 380 of the IPC.

Case diary, as called for, is placed before the Court.

Mr. J.J. Borbhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the petitioners are on interim pre-arrest bail granted vide order, dated 22.02.2019, and that the petitioners appeared before the I.O. and got their statements under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. recorded.

On perusal of the case diary, it is noticed that in terms of the conditions of the interim pre-arrest bail granted vide order, dated 22.02.2019, the petitioners appeared before the I.O. and got their statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.. The petitioners are co-operating in the investigation and there is no adverse report against the petitioners from the I.O. The case diary reveals no justifiable reason for custodial interrogation of the petitioners in the interest of further investigation of the case.

Therefore, the interim anticipatory bail granted in favour of the petitioners, vide order, dated 22.02.2019, is hereby made absolute, subject to the conditions (i) that the petitioners shall appear before the I.O. of the case as and when required for the purpose of investigation; (ii) that the petitioners shall not hamper or tamper with the investigation in any manner; and (iii) that the petitioners 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.

Return the case diary.

With the above directions, the anticipatory bail application stands disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant