Indrajit Ray v. The State of Assam

ORDER Date : 22.02.2024

Heard Mr. N. Ahmed, learned counsel for the accused. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondents.

¶2This application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is preferred by the accused, Page No.# 2/3 namely, Indrajit Ray, who has been languishing in jail hazot in connection with Basistha P.S. Case No. 61/2024, under Section 379 of the IPC, for grant of bail.

¶3It is to be noted here that the aforementioned case has been registered on the basis of an FIR lodged by one Dimbeswar Kakati on 27.01.2024. The essence of allegation made in the FIR dated 27.01.2024 is that on 29.12.2023, two miscreants, namely, Indra Ray and Nazrul, have stolen his E-Rickshaw, bearing Registration No. AS01/ER4769, from Bongaon, Beltola, Guwahati.

¶4Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the accused submits that the accused was arrested on 27.01.2024, and since then he has been languishing in jail hazot for last 27 days, and that he is no way involved in the offence alleged in the FIR and therefore, it is contended to allow this application.

¶5On the other hand, Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary before this Court and submits that the stolen E-Rickshaw has not been recovered yet and investigation is going on and the co-accused are yet to be arrested, and if the accused is enlarged on bail, it will disturb the investigation.

¶6Having heard the submission of learned Advocates of both sides, I have carefully gone through the application and the documents placed on record and also perused the case diary with the assistance of Mr. Sarma, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.

¶7The case diary indicates that the I.O. has collected sufficient incriminating materials in support of the allegation made in the FIR, investigation is still going on and the stolen E-Rickshaw is yet to be recovered and the co-accused are yet to be arrested, and as such, enlarging the accused on bail at this stage will misdirect the investigation.

¶8Accordingly, this Court is of the view that this is not a fit case where the Page No.# 3/3 privilege of bail can be granted to the accused at this stage and accordingly, the bail application stands dismissed.

¶9Case diary be returned. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010032232024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./463/2024 INDRAJIT RAY S/O BIMAL CH RAY, R/O VILL. PAWACHARA, P.S AGAMONI, DIST DHUBRI, ASSAM PRESENT ADD- BELTOLA, BHAGADUTTAPUR, HOUSE NO. 23, P.S. HATIGAON VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP.BY PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N J DUTTA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN