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 5, Cited by 0]

Gauhati High Court

Bibek Das vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 9 June, 2020

Author: Sanjay Kumar Medhi

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Medhi

                                                                                Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010072742020




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

                                  Case No. : AB 1190/2020

            1:BIBEK DAS
            S/O- LT. REBAKANTA DAS, R/O- VILL- KUHIARBARI, P.O. ARAGANG, P.S.
            GINGIA, DIST.- BISWANATH, ASSAM, PIN- 784167

            VERSUS

            1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.
            REP. BY P.P., ASSAM

            2:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
             BISWANATH
             SP OFFICE
             HIGHWAY
             BISWANATH CHARIALI
            ASSAM
             PIN- 78417

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MS. D GHOSH

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM




                                   BEFORE
                  HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

                                          ORDER

09-06-2020 Heard Shri S. Dey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Bibek Das who has filed this application under Section 438 of the CrPC seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Gingia Police Station Case No. 51/2020 registered under Sections 500/505(1)(b)/109 IPC read with Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

Page No.# 2/2 It is submitted that the petitioner has made certain criticism of activities of the Government involving the present pandemic. He has also submitted that pursuant to the interim order dated 19.05.2020, the petitioner has appeared before the concerned IO and his statement has been recorded.

On the other hand, Shri H. Sharma, learned Addl. PP, Assam has produced the Case Diary which includes the statements of the petitioner as well as the offending post made by the petitioner in Facebook. The Case Diary including the post in question do not justify extending the benefit of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the present petition is rejected at this stage, the interim order dated 19.05.2020 is vacated.

The Case Diary is returned back to the learned PP, Assam.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant