Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/5 vs The State Of Assam on 1 August, 2022
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010148932022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/2145/2022
SMT. PREETY RATHI AND ANR.
W/O- SRI SURAJ RATHI, R/O- VILL.- BARPETA ROAD, WARD NO. 6, UNDER
BARPETA ROAD POLICE STATION, DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM
2: SURAJ RATHI
S/O- RAM GOPAL RATHI
R/O- VILL.- BARPETA ROAD
WARD NO. 6
UNDER BARPETA ROAD POLICE STATION
DIST. BARPETA
ASSA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE P.P., ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR D TALUKDAR
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
ORDER
01.08.2022 Heard Mr. D. Talukdar, the learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.
Page No.# 2/5
2. By this application under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the petitioners, namely, Smti Preety Rathi and Sri Suraj Rathi are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with P.R.C. Case No. 785/2021 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 5820/2020 arising out of Barpeta Road Police Station Case No. 591/2020 registered under Sections 498(A)/325/34 IPC and added Section 307 of IPC.
3. The above mentioned petitioners are charge-sheeted in connection with Barpeta Road P.S. Case No. 591/2020 registered under Sections 498(A)/325/34 IPC and added Section 307 of IPC.
4. These two petitioners along with other co-accused persons earlier approached this Court in connection the aforementioned case by way of filing an application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., which was registered and numbered as AB/761/2021. The said application and the prayer of privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners was rejected by this Court on 25.03.2021 considering the gravity of the offence and the complicity of the petitioners in the offence alleged.
5. Thereafter charge-sheet being C-S No. 259/2021 dated 06.09.2021 in connection with Barpeta Road P.S. Case No. 591/2020 registered under Sections 498(A)/325/34 IPC and added Section 307 of IPC was submitted wherein the petitioners were shown as absconder.
6. Subsequent to this, the petitioners once again approached this Court by filing another application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. which was registered and numbered as AB/339/2022. The said application was disposed of by this Court under its order dated 07.02.2022 and directed the petitioners to appear before the learned court below for regular bail, Page No.# 3/5 and also giving liberty to approach the learned Sessions Court and it was provided that the learned court will decide the same in accordance with law.
7. Thereafter, the petitioners filed an Interlocutory Application being I.A. (Crl.)/256/2022 in the aforesaid AB/339/2022 seeking certain clarifications which was clarified by this Court under its order dated 10.06.2022 clarifying that the petitioners are at liberty to approach directly the learned Sessions Court, without approaching to the other Court.
8. Mr. Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that such clarification was sought for as the case was at committal stage before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate and it was an apprehension of the petitioners that since the case was exclusively triable by the learned Sessions Court, the learned Magistrate would not have allowed their regular bail application.
9. Subsequent to such clarification, the petitioners approached the learned Sessions Judge by filing a Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 426/2022 under Section 438 Cr.P.C., which was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Barpeta under its order dated 05.07.2022. Such bail application was rejected on the ground that this Court in its order dated 25.03.2021 passed in AB/761/2021, observed that sufficient materials are there and for that reason this Court had already rejected such application.
10. Being situated thus, the petitioners have once again approached this Court by filing another application registered and numbered as AB/1948/2022, which was also rejected by this Court, however, not on merit but for want of sufficient documents which are necessary for proper Page No.# 4/5 adjudication of this matter. Accordingly, the present application is filed annexing the earlier orders and the materials which are necessary for proper determination.
11. Mr. Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are permanent resident of the locality as described in the present application and they have been staying in the said locality having their business etc. They cannot be said to be absconder inasmuch as the procedure required for declaring a person as absconder as provided under Sections 82 and 83 of the Cr.P.C. has not been followed. Mr. Talukdar, further submits that the petitioners are willing to participate in the proceeding and abide by any condition.
12. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor objecting the prayer of the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since there were sufficient materials in the case diary which is reflected in the order of this Court, the petitioners are not entitled for privilege of bail. Therefore, he submits that the present application is liable to be rejected.
13. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Perused the materials available on record. From the aforesaid materials, it is apparent that the case is still at committal stage. The trial in true sense has not yet started. The petitioners are also permanent resident of the locality and taking into their willingness to participate in the proceeding before the Courts below and also considering their right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, this Court is of the considered opinion that putting behind bar the petitioners at this stage will not give any benefit to the prosecution as the charge-sheet has already been filed. Nor the same would prejudice the trial.
Page No.# 5/5
14. That being the position, this Court is satisfied to grant the pre-arrest bail to the petitioners above named. In the event of arrest of the petitioners above named, in connection with the case aforementioned, they shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/- each with a suitable surety of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of arresting authority. The pre-arrest bail is granted on the following conditions:
I. The petitioners shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the aforesaid police station, without prior written permission from its officer-in-charge, II. The petitioners shall not hamper with the investigation, or tamper with the evidence of the case, III. 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer, IV. The petitioners shall appear before the learned Committal Magistrate on 30.08.2022. V. The petitioners shall continue to appear before the Committal Magistrate/Trial Court on each and every date when the matter is fixed.
With the aforesaid observation and direction, this application is disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant