THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM v. THE STATE OF ASSAM
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 07 Feb 2023
- Bench
- KALYAN RAI SURANA
Outcome
Bail granted
Bail is granted on the following conditions:
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 439
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 120(B), 325, 341, 354(B), 379, 506
- Information Technology Act, 2000 s. 67
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. Bail is granted on the following conditions: I. The petitioner shall make himself available to the police or any other investigating agency or Court in the present case as and when required. II. The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat…
Judgment
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R ALI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA Date : 07.02.2023 ORDER Heard Mr. H.A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned APP appearing for the State. Page No.# 2/4
The petitioner, who was arrested on 15.12.2022, is seeking regular bail under section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with Barpeta P.S. Case No. 1206/2022, under sections 120(B)/354(B)/325/379/341/506 IPC, read with section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2020, corresponding to G.R. No. 2246/2022.
The learned APP has produced the case dairy and has opposed the prayer for bail.
On perusal of the case diary, it is seen that the petitioner is the FIR named accused no.4 and the acquisition against the petitioner in the FIR is that the petitioner, in conspiracy with the FIR named first accused and others had snatched Rs.20,000/- from the bag of the informant and she was assaulted on different parts of her body and her gold chain, ring, ear rings and mobile phone were also looted. The petitioner and other FIR named accused persons are also accused of taking naked photographs of the victim and making it viral and at last, tied her to a tree. It does not appear from the case diary that any mobile phone or equipment by which the photographs were taken was seized. It appears from the note of the I/O in the case diary that he has seized a memory card produced by the victim where a video is available. There is no note in the case diary that the memory card containing video was sent for FSL as to what is the content of the video. There is also no note of the I/O in the case diary that the victim was sent for her medical examination.
In view of above, the Court is of the considered opinion that further custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be necessary. Hence, the Court Page No.# 3/4 is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, namely, Samad Khan in connection with the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/- with one suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barpeta.
Operative part
Bail is granted on the following conditions: I. The petitioner shall make himself available to the police or any other investigating agency or Court in the present case as and when required. II. The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to the victim or to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. He shall not, in any manner, try to overawe or influence or intimidate the prosecution witness. III. The petitioner shall not obstruct the smooth progress of the investigation/trial. IV. The petitioner shall not misuse his liberty in any manner. V. The petitioner shall appear before the I/O within 10 (ten) days from the date of his release and he shall continue to appear once in every month till his appearance is dispensed with by the I/O or charge- sheet is filed, whichever is earlier.
In the event the petitioner violates any of the terms on which bail has been granted, the I/O shall be at liberty to move the jurisdictional Court and Page No.# 4/4 apply for cancellation of bail.
This application stands disposed of.
Case diary is returned. JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Bail is granted on the following conditions:
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 439; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 120(B), 325, 341, 354(B), 379, 506; Information Technology Act, 2000 — s. 67.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Gauhati High Court, on 07 Feb 2023. The bench was KALYAN RAI SURANA.
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.