Kushal Khanikar and Anr v. The State of Assam

ORDER Date : 12-06-2024

Heard Mr. B. Bora, learned counsel for the petitioners 1. Sri Kushal Khanikar and Sri Moina Khanikar. Page No.# 2/3

¶2The petitioners have filed this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC for short) with a prayer for pre-arrest bail as they are apprehending arrest in connection with G.R. Case No. 3285/2017 arising out of Lakhimpur Police Station Case No. 1389/2017 under Sections 341/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC for short) pending in the Court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (S), Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur.

¶3Also heard Mr. K. Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the respondent State.

¶4The allegation against the petitioners is that they have committed murder on Bidyut Saikia on 10.11.2017. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they are willing to cooperate with the trial. Charge sheet has been laid against them and as they were not aware of this case, they were shown as absconders when charge sheet was laid against them.

¶5The petitioners have prayed for pre-arrest bail as they are apprehending that as soon as they appear before the Eleka Magistrate, they will be forwarded to custody as they are booked under Section 302 of the IPC and hence, this petition, praying for protection under Section 438 of the CrPC.

¶6It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that earlier an FIR was lodged by the petitioner No. 1 Kushal Khanikar against the deceased Bidyut Saikia @ Kantu Chutia, who had assaulted the informant Kushal Khanikar's son. Annexure-5 is the FIR against the deceased Bidyut Saikia @ Kantu Chutia.

¶7I have considered the submissions at the bar with circumspection. I have also scrtutnized the Trial Court Records.

¶8The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised serious objection. Page No.# 3/3

¶9Provisions under Section 438 of the CrPC cannot be exercised in an untrammeled manner. The allegation against the petitioners is of serious nature.

¶10I have considered the magnitude of the offence and the role attributed to the petitioners. At this juncture there appears to be no justified ground to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶11Petition stands rejected. The petitioners are directed to appear before the Committal Court and apply for bail, which may be considered by the Court as per law.

¶12In the above terms, this Anticipatory Bail application stands dismissed.

¶13Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010105712024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1374/2024 KUSHAL KHANIKAR AND ANR S/O NOBIN KHANIKAR, R/O VILL- NO. 1 BAMUNIJAN, P.S.-NORTH LAKHIMPUR, DIST- LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM 2: MOINA KHANIKAR S/O KUSHAL KHANIKAR R/O VILL- NO. 1 BAMUNIJAN P.S.-NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST- LAKHIMPUR ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B BORA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND