THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM & Anr. v. THE STATE OF ASSAM
Case at a glance
- Bench
- ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
Outcome
Disposed of
Bail application stands disposed of
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 438
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 294, 307, 325, 420, 506
Judgment
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S BORTHAKUR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
O R D E R
Operative part
03.05.2024 Heard learned counsel for the parties. This is an application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. praying for granting pre- Page No.# 2/2 arrest bail to the petitioners, namely, 1. Umesh Kushwaha and 2. Basudev Dhar in connection with Guwahati GRPS case No. 191/2023 under Section 325/307/420/506/294/34 IPC. Case diary produced by the learned Additional Public Prosecution is perused. This court granted interim protection to the petitioners on 17.11.2023. The petitioner No. 2, Basudev Dhar appeared before the Investigating Officer and co- operated with the investigation. Considering the material so far collected, stage of investigation, this court is of the view that custodial detention of the petitioner No. 2 may not be necessary for further investigation inasmuch as the petitioner No. 2, Basudev Dhar has co-operated with the investigation. Accordingly, the interim protection granted to the petitioner No. 2, Basudev Dhar vide order dated 17.11.2023 is hereby made absolute on the same terms and conditions. However, in spite of this court’s interim protection, the petitioner No.1, Umesh Kushwaha has not appeared before the Investigating Officer and has not co-operated with the investigation. Considering above, the interim order granted to the petitioner No. 1, Umesh Kushwaha vide order dated 17.11.2023 stands vacated. Bail application stands disposed of. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Bail application stands disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 34, 294, 307, 325, 420, 506.
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.