- Court
- High Court of Gauhati
- Decided
- 8 April 2024
- Bench
- S. Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund
- Case no.
- AB 442/2024
Judgment
ORDER Date : 09-04-2024 Heard Mr. P.K. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner Shri Kishor Kumar Sarma.
¶2The petitioner has filed this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with a prayer for pre-arrest bail as he is apprehending Page No.# 2/3 arrest in connection with Pragjyotishpur Police Station Case No. 24/2024 registered under Sections 120(B)/468/419/471/472/473 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
¶3Heard Mr. R. R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State.
¶4It is submitted by the Additional Public Prosecutor that the petitioner has appeared before the Investigating Officer and his statement has been recorded.
¶5It is submitted by Mr. Deka, the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is accused No. 5 of the instant FIR and he is a bona fide purchaser of the land and he has committed no offence as alleged in the FIR. He has obtained no objection certificate and other documents relating to power of attorney and mutation certificate issued in favour of the land owners. Thereafter, he entered into an agreement for purchase of land measuring 1 Khata out of 2 Bighas 2 Kathas under Dag No. 91 covered by KP Patta No. 22 of Village Kharguli under Mouza Beltola in the District of Kamrup (Metro), Guwahati. He received a notice under Section 41(A) Cr.P.C. and accordingly he appeared before the I.O. and his statement has been recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. He further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the I.O., if the privilege of pre-arrest bail is granted to him.
¶6I have considered the submissions that the petitioner has cooperated with the trial and he has not violated any bail conditions.
¶7I have perused the Case Diary.
¶8Investigation has also progressed to a considerable extent. It appears that custodial interrogation may not be required.
¶9In view of my foregoing discussion, the order dated 23.02.2024 is hereby Page No.# 3/3 made absolute.
Send back the Case Diary.
Anticipatory Bail application stands disposed of in the above terms.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Case details
Parties and counsel
Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010036072024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/442/2024 SHRI KISHOR KUMAR SARMA S/O LT. BIJOY CHANDRA SARMA R/O H. NO. 8, NARENGI TINIALI, SAMANNAY PATH, P.S. NOONMATI, DIST.KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, GHY-26 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP.BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P K DEKA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
Source: High Court of Gauhati, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.