Rajashri Devi v. The State of Assam

ORDER Date : 14.11.2024 Heard Mr. HRA Choudhury, the learned Sr. Counsel assisted by Mr. A. M. Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.RJ. Baruah, learned Additional P.P. for the State of Assam.

¶2This is an application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 praying for releasing the petitioner, Rajashri Devi on bail, who was arrested in connection with Nagaon P. S. Case No. Page No.# 2/3 942/2024.

¶3There is a Grade-IV employee named Rimi Kalita, who works in the office of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagaon. In the same office the present petitioner works as a Junior Assistant. The informant, Minakshi Keut Bora had gone to the office of the Additional Commissioner, Nagaon, which is situated near the office of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagaon. She and her husband went there for a mutation case. At that time, the informant met Rimi Kalita. She told the informant that the Additional Commissioner and the Circle Officer of Samaguri Revenue Circle are known to her and she can help the informant to get a favourable result in the aforesaid mutation case.

¶4This time Rimi Kalita pointed towards the present petitioner and told her that she is the Circle Officer of Samaguri Revenue Circle and also told the informant that she has to pay an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- to the said Circle Officer. Accordingly, the informant paid a total amount of Rs. 20,000 to the present petitioner through Google Pay. In spite of paying the said amount nothing was done and Rimi Kalita started to avoid the informant. Finally, the husband of the informant asked Rimi Kalita to return the aforesaid amount of Rs. 20,000/-. It is alleged that Rimi Kalita threatened him to implicate him in a false case.

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

¶6Mr. Choudhury has submitted that Rimi Kalita was suffering from cancer and therefore, she had borrowed Rs. 20,000/- from the present petitioner as loan. The present petitioner had the impression that by paying the amount of Rs. 20,000/-, Rumi Kalita had to pay a part of the aforesaid loan.

¶7Mr. Baruah has submitted that both Rimi Kalita and the present petitioner were cheating people intentionally.

¶8This Court if of the opinion that the present petitioner no longer deserves to be detained in custody as she has been in custody for the last 61 days. Therefore, her bail application is allowed.

¶9Accordingly, the petitioner, namely, Rajashri Devi shall be allowed to go on bail of Rs.20,000/- with a surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Nagaon. Page No.# 3/3

¶10The bail application stands disposed of accordingly. The CD shall be returned.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010219652024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3217/2024 RAJASHRI DEVI W/O DIBYA JYOTI MAHANTA, VILL- KHUTIKATIA BISHNU NAGAR, P.S.- NAGAON SADAR, DIST- NAGAON, ASSAM-782002 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R A CHOUDHURY, B DAS,P. GHOSH,MRS S RAHANA,MR. A M AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA