Rahul Das v. The State of Assam and Anr

ORDER Date : 08.08.2024

Heard Mr. A. Ahmed, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. B. Sarma, the learned counsel appearing for the State of Assam.

¶2This is an application under section 528 of BNSS, 2023 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the impugned order dated

28.12.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, Karimganj in Sessions Special (POCSO) Case No. 201/2023.

¶3The petitioner alongwith some other persons are facing trial before the court below. The trial court granted bail to the present petitioner on a condition that he would have to furnish two sureties and one of the sureties must be a Government servant.

¶4Thereafter, on two occasions, the petitioner furnished sureties as directed by the court below. But on both those occasions, the trial court did not find the Government servant to be satisfactory.

¶5I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels of both sides.

¶6It is a settled position of law that if the bail bonds are not furnished within one month from the date of grant of bail, the concerned court may suo moto take up the case and consider whether the conditions of bail require modification/relaxation. It is also a settled position of law that one of the reasons, which delay the release of the accused/convict is the insistence upon local surety. It is suggested that in such cases, the courts may not impose the Page No.# 3/3 condition of local surety (2023 SCC Online SC 483).

¶7The bail order was passed by the learned trial court more than 6 (six) months ago. Therefore, the learned trial court should have considered the modification of the order. The trial court did not do so.

¶8Therefore, the impugned order is set aside.

¶9The learned trial court is directed not to insist upon furnishing a Government servant. The trial court shall release the accused/petitioner on local sureties only. The impugned bail order stands modified accordingly.

¶10With the aforesaid directions, the criminal petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010157582024 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oCrl.Pet./935/2024o RAHULoDASo S/OoLATEoNARAYANoCHANDRAoDASo R/OoQUARTERoNO.o6N-8B,oRAILWAYoCOLONY,o P.S.oKARIMGANJo DIST.oKARIMGANJ,oASSAM VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDoANRo TOoBEoREP.oBYoTHEoPP,oASSAM 2:BRAJENDRAoDAS oS/OoNITYANANDAoDASo R/OoSARISHAoMEDOLoPART-Io P.O.oSILCHARoROAD o P.S.oKARIMGANJo DIST.oKARIMGANJ oASSAo AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oMR.oAoAHMED,oMRoAoAHMED,UoUoKHANo AdvocateoforotheoRespondento:oPP,oASSAM,oo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA