Jaydeep Singh v. The State of Assam

ORDER

26.06.2024

¶1Heard Mr. T.N. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Ms. S. Jahan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State respondent. Page No.# 2/3

¶2This application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Jaydeep Singh, who has been detained behind the bars since 20.05.2024 (for last more than 1 month) in connection with G.R. Case No. 6279/2015.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was arrested on strength of the non-bailable warrant of arrest issued by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamrup(M), Guwahati.

¶4The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had also filed an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge

(FTC) No. 4, Kamrup (M), Guwahati which, was rejected by the said Court on the ground that the plea taken by the petitioner of having communication gap between engaged counsel is considered to be a lame excuse.

¶5The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he could not appear before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamrup(M), Guwahati, where the G.R. Case No. 6279/2015, is pending as during Covid-19 period, he lost touch with his engaged counsel and he was not aware about the date fixed by the Trial Court.

¶6The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is ready to face the trial and shall co-operate in the trial.

¶7I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the sides and have perused the materials available on record.

¶8Considering the materials available on record, it appears that the Trial Court had issued non-bailable warrant of arrest to the petitioner, as he defaulted in appearing before the said Court. However, the cause shown by the petitioner in his bail application as well as the assurance given by the learned counsel for Page No.# 3/3 the petitioner that he shall co-operate in his trial and shall not default henceforth.

¶9This Court is of the considered opinion that further custodial detention of the petitioner may not be necessary for fair completion of the trial.

¶10Hence, the above-named petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs. 30,000/- with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamrup(M), Guwahati, before which G.R. Case No. 6279/2015 is pending.

¶11With the above observations, this bail application is hereby disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010128262024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1846/2024 JAYDEEP SINGH S/O LT. JAMINI PRASAD SINGH R/O PRAKRITIS ABODE, FLAT NO. 403, PUBERUN PATH, FOREST GATE NEAR AMRIT UDYAN, HENGRABARI, GUWAHATI, P.O. AND P.S. DISPUR DIST. KAMRUP (METRO), ASSAM PIN-781006 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. T N DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA