Bharat Deka v. The State of Assam

ORDER Date : 12-01-2024

¶1Heard Mr. U.K. Barman, learned counsel for the petitioner Bharat Deka.

¶2The petitioner has filed this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with prayer for bail as he is behind bars since

02.12.2023 in connection with Cyber Police Station Case No. 12/2023 under Page No.# 2/3 Sections 120B/419/420 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 66C/66D of the Information and Technology Act.

¶3Heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State of Assam.

¶4The FIR unfolds that on 01.11.2023 the Circle Officer, Shri Papu Gogoi learnt about unauthorized access of CO login of Dispur Revenue Circle and the detailed report of the matter was submitted to the District Commissioner, Kamrup(M). It was uncovered that a mutation order was passed online in Dhartree portal on 05.10.2023 in Case No. MET/DIS/202-23/96042/OMUT against a deed bearing serial No. 6268 dated 31.12.1995, wherein no offline case record of any notice issued or order etc. were available in the office. Upon enquiry, the Lat Mandal reported that neither field verification nor any report was submitted in respect of the referred mutation case. The DIO, NIC, Kamrup(M) was asked to unearth the history details from 01.10.2023 to

26.10.2023 and it was found that:

¶1That an IP address 10.177.88.65 had record of login/logout history of 52 times from 04.10.2023 to 26.10.2023.

¶2The IP address 10.177.88.58 had recorded twice login/logout history on

10.10.2023.

¶5The list of official 33 Operational IP Addresses in the office of the Circle Officer, Dispur Revenue Circle does not contain the aforementioned IP addresses, which depicts unauthorized login and logout by the aforementioned IP addresses.

¶6The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised serious objection stating that there are incriminating materials in the case diary against the Page No.# 3/3 petitioner. I have perused the case diary. Indeed there are incriminating materials in the case diary against the petitioner. Investigation has progressed to a considerable extent. The custodial detention for the progress of investigation may not be required. The petitioner is a local resident and he has pledged to cooperate with the investigation. The petitioner has submitted that he will abide by any of the bail conditions, purported to be imposed upon him.

¶7Considering all aspects, petition is allowed.

¶8The petitioner is enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup(M) under the conditions:

¶1The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidences,

¶2the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the jurisdictional Court without prior written permission till completion of investigation as well as trial.

¶3The petitioner shall refrain from such activities with which he is alleged.

¶9On breach of any of the bail conditions, bail order shall stand cancelled.

Bail Application stands disposed of in the above terms.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010000252024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./46/2024 BHARAT DEKA SON OF SUKUNA DEKA, RESIDENT OF POSORIA, DODORA, POLICE STATION- HAZO, DISTRICT- KAMRUP M, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K NATH Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND