Mridul Munda v. The State of Assam

ORDER

05.01.2024

Heard Ms. C. Kalita, learned counsel for the accused and Mr. R.J. Barua, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.

¶2This application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is preferred by accused namely, Sri Mridul Munda, who has Page No.# 2/3 been languishing in jail hazot since 19.11.2023, in connection with the Baihata Chariali P.S. Case No. 355/2023, under Section 306 of the IPC, for granting bail.

¶3The said case has been registered on the basis of one FIR lodged by one Minakshi Marak, on 18.11.2023. The essence of allegations made in the FIR is that on 17.11.2023, at about 2 pm, her daughter committed suicide by hanging in her house and she suspects that one Mridul Munda, who had relationship with her dauther is responsible for the incident of committing suicide by her daughter.

¶4Ms. Kalita, learned counsel for the accused submits that the accused has been languishing in jail hazot for last 48 days and that the accused is no way involved with the offence alleged in the FIR and therefore, it is contended to allow the petition.

¶5On the other hand, Mr. Barua, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary before this Court and submits that the case diary indicates about relationship between the victim and the accused. Mr. Barua further submits that in the case diary there is no indication as to why the victim girl had committed suicide.

¶6Having heard the submissions of learned Advocates of both sides, I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and also perused the Case Diary with the assistance of learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

¶7It appears that the accused has been languishing in jail hazot for last 48 days. Further, it appears from the case diary that the I.O. has achieved substantial progress in the investigation of the case. Page No.# 3/3

¶8Having considered the materials collected so far in the case diary and also considering the length of detention, this Court is of the view that further custodial detention of the accused seems to be unwarranted here in this case and accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 50,000/- only, with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned SDJM [M], Rangia, the accused be enlarged on bail.

¶9In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of.

¶10The case diary be returned.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010286902023 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./4574/2023 MRIDUL MUNDA S/O LATE RAMAI MUNDA R/O VILL- MAHARIPARA RAMGAON P.S. GORESWAR DIST. BAKSA, ASSAM P/ADDRESS- VILL- KUMNAGAON P.S. BAIHATA CHARIALI DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A K AZAD Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN