Tazinder Singh @ Tajinder Singh and Anr.9 Ors v. The State of Assam

ORDER Date : 08.11.2023

Heard Mr. B.K. Mahajan, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. M. Phukan, learned Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶2This is an application made under Section 439 Cr.P.C., seeking bail by the accused-petitioners, namely, (i) Tazinder Singh @ Tajinder Singh (ii) Nitin Chauhan (iii) Rahul Gera (iv) Gaurav Arya (v) Barun Sarma @ Varun Sharma (vi) Prakash Singh (vii) Jitu Sood @ Jintender (viii) Swabhiman Bhola @ Sam (ix) Yash Kamble @ Yash Pradeep Kamble, in connection with Cyber P.S. FIR No. 08/2023, registered under Section 120B/419/420/385/467/471/468/507

IPC

r/w

Section 65/66/66B/66C/66D of IT Act 2000.

¶3It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the accused-petitioners that the petitioners had not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. It is also submitted that the petitioners were arrested only on suspicion without having any evidence against them. It is further submitted that the Page No.# 3/4 accused-petitioners have been detained in custody since 16.09.2023, i.e. 53 days. Nothing was seized by police in connection with alleged case. Learned counsel has pointed out that no any victim has made any whisper that they have been cheated by the alleged accused/petitioners. FIR was lodged by one Inspector, Crime Branch, Guwahati.

¶4It is also the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that except the offence under Section 467 IPC, the mandatory period of other alleged offences are 60 days. Section 467 IPC is not attracted here in this case as because there is no allegation against the petitioners that they forged any document which purports to be a valuable security/will etc. In fact, police has failed to seize any article during investigation.

¶5It is also submitted that the petitioners are newly appointed in call centers in Guwahati through online advertisement who had no knowledge about the alleged scam, if any. Considering the nature of offence as well as length of detention, petitioners may be enlarged on bail.

¶6In response, Mr. Phukan, learned Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed in grating bail to the accused/petitioners. It is submitted that the crime has been committed in an organized manner and the investigation is still going on, so that the prayer of the accused/petitioners may not be considered at this stage.

¶7I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. I have also perused the case diary along with other relevant documents available thereon.

¶8Considering the materials found in the case diary as well as the length of detention of the accused-petitioners in custody, this Court is of the view that further custodial interrogation of the accused-petitioners is not necessary in the Page No.# 4/4 interest of investigation of the case.

¶9Accordingly, the accused-petitioners, named above, shall be released on bail in connection with Cyber P.S. FIR No. 08/2023, registered under Section 120B/419/420/385/467/471/468/507 IPC r/w Section 65/66/66B/66C/66D of IT Act 2000, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/- each with two suitable sureties each of the like amount out of which one of the sureties should be a Government employee, to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Kamrup(M), Guwahati.

¶10The direction for bail is further subject to the conditions that the accused-petitioners:

(a) shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of learned CJM, Kamrup(M), Guwahati, without prior written permission from him/her;

(b) shall not hamper with the investigation, or tamper with the evidence of the case;

(c) shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

(d) shall appear before the Investigating Police Officer once in a week for six weeks after their release on bail as and when called upon by the Investigating Police Officer till the investigation of the case is completed.

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

¶12Send back the case diary.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010236192023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oBailoAppln./3690/2023o TAZINDERoSINGHo@oTAJINDERoSINGHoANDoANR.9oORS S/OoLT.oAMARJEEToSINGHoR/Oo16/94oEASToPATELoNAGARoP.SoPATELoNAGARo NEWoDELHIo11008 2:oNITINoCHAUHAN S/OoLT.oSHRIoPREMoCHANDo@oLT.oSREEoPREMoCHAND oR/OoHOUSEoNO.o53o4THoFLOORoKUMARoVALLIoGULLYoP.SoJANGPURAoDELHI 110044 o3:oRAHULoGERA S/OoPARMODoGERAoR/OoHOUSEoNO.o3178oMAHINDRAoPARKoP.SoRANIBAGHo NEWoDELHIo110034 o4:oGAURAVoARYA S/OoDIGAMBARoRAMo@oDIGAMBERoRAMoR/OoFLAToNO.o488/1oSEWAoNAGARo P.S.oLODHIoROADoNEWoDELHIo110003 o5:oBARUNoSARMAo@oVARUNoSHARMA S/OoLT.oBIJAYoSARMAo@oVIJAYoKUMARoSHARMAoR/OoHOUSEoNO.o1/2o SECTORo5oRAJENDARoNAGARoGAJIABADoP.S.oKARANGATEoUTTARo PRADESHo2011010 o6:oPRAKASHoSINGH S/OoTILAKoSINGHo@oTILAKoDHARIoSINGHoR/OoHoNO.o63oLILUAHo PATUAPARALoHOWRAHoP.SoLILUAHoWESToBENGALo711204 o7:oJITUoSOODo@oJITENDER S/OoJAGADISHoSOODo@oJAGDISHoR/OoHOUSEoNO.oBo1040oBADARURoSOUTHo DELHIo110044 o8:oSWABHIMANoBHOLAo@oSAM S/OoLToRAJENDARoKR.oBHOLAo@oRAJENDERoKUMARoR/OoJ220/54oAoBISHNUo GARDENoP.SoTILAKoNAGARoNEWoDELHIo110018 Page No.# 2/4 9: YASH KAMBLE @ YASH PRADEEP KAMBLE S/O PRADEEP KAMBLE @ PRADEEP RAGHUNATH KAMBLE R/O BMC CHAWAL NO. 12 ROOM NO. 131 A DOCTOR ANNIE BASANT ROAD P.S WORLI MAHARASHTRA 400018 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR. D BORA Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI