SRI PETER TISSO v. THE STATE OF ASSAM
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
In view of the above, the bail application stands disposed of as allowed
Provisions considered
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 s. 483
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ss. 61(2), 308(5), 351(3)
- Information Technology Act, 2000 s. 67A
Key paragraphs
- Para 88. In view of the above, the bail application stands disposed of as allowed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Judgment
SRI PETER TISSO S/O - LONGSING TISSO, R/O VILL - DAK TERANG GAON, P.O AND P.S- DIPHU, DIST - KARBI-ANGLONG, ASSAM, PIN- 782460. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE P.P, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M KALITA, MR. N M DAS,MR. J HATIMURIA,MR. A PHUKAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA Date : 18-11-2025 ORDER Heard Mr. M. Kalita, learned counsel for the accused applicant and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.
This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of regular bail of the accused applicant in connection with the Diphu P.S. Case No. 79/2025 under Sections 61(2)/308(5)/351(3) of the BNS, 2023 read Page No.# 2/3 with Section 67A of the IT Act, 2000.
An FIR was lodged on 15.09.2025, alleging that the informant’s father was honey trapped by one Smti. Mirdalin Teronpi at their flat at Guwahati and she tried to blackmail the informant’s father hand in hand with one Ex. Militant, namely, Augustin Kramsa. It was alleged that the whole incident was video graphed and the video footage was in the possession of accused applicant as well as other persons, namely, Ex. Militant Augustin Kramsa and Ingjoy Tisso. Subsequently, the informant’s father has paid the Ex. Militant Augustin Kramsa a sum of Rs.30,00,00/- and another Rs.28,00,00/- to Smt. Mirdalin Teronpi.
On the basis of the FIR, the Diphu P.S. Case No. 79/2025 under Sections 61(2)/308(5)/351(3) of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 67A of the IT Act, 2000 was registered.
Mr. M. Kalita, learned counsel appearing for the accused applicant submits that the accused applicant was arrested on 19.09.2025 and he has already spent more than 60 days, to be precise 61 days, behind the bar. Therefore, he submits that since the mandatory period of 60 days is completed, the accused applicant is liable to be granted privilege of default bail.
Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, on instructions, submits that charge sheet in the instant matter is yet to be filed.
In view of the aforesaid facts, it is directed that the accused applicant shall be released forthwith on bail, on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with surety of one like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistate, Karbi Anglong, Diphu, subject to the following conditions: i. that the accused applicant shall cooperate with the Page No.# 3/3 investigation and trial of the case; ii. that the accused applicant shall not hamper or tamper with the evidence or investigation
Operative part
In view of the above, the bail application stands disposed of as allowed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In view of the above, the bail application stands disposed of as allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 61(2), 308(5), 351(3); Information Technology Act, 2000 — s. 67A.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Gauhati High Court, on 18 Nov 2025. The bench was ANJAN MONI KALITA.
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.