THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM v. THE STATE OF ASSAM
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 25 Feb 2022
- Bench
- AJIT BORTHAKUR
Outcome
Bail refused
Accordingly, the pre-arrest bail application stands rejected
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 438
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 307, 325, 447, 506
Judgment
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M KALITA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR Date : 25.02.2022 ORDER Heard Mr. M. Kalita, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Das, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State/respondent. By this petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the petitioner, namely, Sri Ranjit Barman, has prayed for granting pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Belsor P.S. Case No. 458/2021 registered u/s 447/325/307/506 of the IPC. The case diary, as called for, is placed before this Court. Page No.# 2/2 It may be mentioned that by order, dated 07.01.2022, this Court granted the privilege of interim pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. The FIR reveals the allegation that on 05.11.2021 at about 5.30 PM, due to old grudge, the FIR named accused person rushed towards the house of Sri Pradip Barman with intent to injure him and assaulted on his head and various parts of his body with bamboo stick and, thereafter, he was admitted in Sarathi Medical, Nalbari. The medical report shows that the injured Pradip Barman was admitted on
05.11.2021 in Nalbari Multispecialty Hospital for physical assault and discharged on
Operative part
15.11.2021. On scrutiny of the case diary, it is seen that there is prima facie clear implicating material against the petitioner. The case diary also reveals the petitioner’s history of criminal antecedent in the village. On careful consideration of pros and cons of the evidence, so far collected by the Investigating Officer, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the pre-arrest bail application stands rejected. Interim order passed earlier on 07.01.2022 stands vacated. Return the case diary. This disposes of the anticipatory bail application. JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the pre-arrest bail application stands rejected
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 307, 325, 447, 506.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Gauhati High Court, on 25 Feb 2022. The bench was AJIT BORTHAKUR.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.