Bablu Sharma and Anr v. The State of Assam

ORDER

02.09.2024

¶1Heard Mr. D. Medhi, learned counsel for the petitioners namely, (i) Bablu Sharma, and (ii) Bishnu Pradhan. Page No.# 2/3

¶2The petitioners have filed this application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with prayer for bail as they are behind bars since 17.08.2024 in connection with Jalukbari P.S. Case No. 393/2024 under Sections 61(2)/189(2)/296/115(2)/132/12793)/324(3)(5)/3(5) of the BNS.

¶3Heard Mr. B. B. Gogoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the respondent State.

¶4I have considered the submissions at the Bar.

¶5The FIR unfolds that on 15.08.2024 at around 9 p.m., a quarrel broke out between the two groups, the complainants, Jitul Bhargab Sharma and Sunny Kalita lodged two complaints with the police and a GD entry was registered as 21 dated 15.08.2024. The above named complainants were provided medical treatment and it was informed that investigation would commence on the basis of the complaint. After a while, the above named complainants entered the police station with a group of inebriated miscreants and threatened the O/C, SI, Mazibul Islam and other police personnel present. The above named complainants demanded the police personnel to arrest the accused. Despite the assertion of the police personnel that they would take action, a chaotic situation was created by the above named complainants and their companions. Some police personnel came out of the police station to bring the situation under control and a woman named Tulu Devi also provoked the miscreants who dragged the informant, a police personnel out of the police station and harassed him and recorded video. Some persons were injured in the process. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they were on the contrary trying to control the unholy group who were indulging in intake of alcohol.

¶6I have considered the submission that investigation has progressed to a Page No.# 3/3 considerable extent. I have scrutinized the Case Diary. It appears that further custodial detention may not be required for the progress of investigation.

¶7I have considered the submission that the petitioners are willing to co-operate with the remaining part of the investigation and to abide by any stringent bail conditions if imposed upon them.

¶8Considering all aspects, petition is allowed. The petitioners shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) each with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Kamrup, (M), under the conditions that:

(i) The petitioners shall co-operate with the remaining part of investigation,

(ii) The petitioners shall refrain from such activities with which they are alleged and maintain the peace, and

(iii) The petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.

¶9On breach of any of the bail conditions, bail order shall stand automatically cancelled.

¶10Send back the Case diary.

¶11In terms of the above observation, bail application stands disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010171922024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2549/2024 BABLU SHARMA AND ANR S/O NAREN SHARMA, R/O KHAMAKHYA DHAM, BHAGOLA MANDIR, P.S.- JALUKBARI, DIST- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM 2: BISHNU PRADHAN S/O LATE RAJKUMAR PRADHAN R/O KAMAKHYA NURSERY LALITA KANTA P.S.-JALUKBARI DIST- KAMRUP (M) ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR K THAKUR, MR. S SARKAR,MS. P. NAIDING,MR D MEDHI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND