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 8, Cited by 0]

Gauhati High Court

Sanjay Barman @ Sanjay Roy vs The State Of Assam on 14 December, 2022

Author: Manish Choudhury

Bench: Manish Choudhury

                                                                                 Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010244202022




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

                                   Case No. : AB/3535/2022

            SANJAY BARMAN @ SANJAY ROY
            S/O- RAJU ROY, R/O- VILLAGE CHAGALIA PART II,
            P.O- CHAGALIA, P.S- GOLAKGANJ, DIST- DHUBRI, ASSAM



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM
            REP.BY THE PP, ASSAM



Advocate for the Petitioner   : MRS. K DEVI

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM




                                    BEFORE
                   HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

                                          ORDER

14.12.2022 Heard Ms. K. Devi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State of Assam.

2. By this application under Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [CrPC], the petitioner viz. Sanjay Barman @ Sanjay Roy has approached this Court seeking the benefit of pre-arrest bail, apprehending his arrest, in connection with Golakganj Police Station Case no.

Page No.# 2/2 219/2022 registered under Sections 448/376/511/506, Indian Penal Code [IPC].

3. Mr. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has, on instruction, submitted that after completion of the investigation in connection with Golakganj Police Station Case no. 219/2022, the Investigating Officer [I.O.] of the case has already submitted a charge sheet under Section 173[2], CrPC vide Charge Sheet no. 549/2022 dated 30.10.2022.

4. In view of submission of the charge sheet in the case, Ms. Devi, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner will approach the learned jurisdictional trial court seeking regular bail.

5. In view of the said submission of Ms. Devi, this application stands closed, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the learned jurisdictional trial court.

6. It is expected that in the event the petitioner approaches the jurisdictional trial court by filing any application seeking regular bail, the jurisdictional trial court will consider such application on its own merits and in accordance with law.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant