Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Ajit Borthakur, J.
Khargeswar Rajbongshi - Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam - Respondent
A.B. No. 583 of 2021
Decided On : 16-03-2021
Pre-arrest Bail - Criminal Procedure - The court rejected the petitioner's application for pre-arrest bail after finding sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner and opining that it was not a fit case to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a petition for pre-arrest bail apprehending arrest in connection with a case under Section 294(a)/326/506/34 of the IPC. The petitioner's counsel argued that the accusation was false and made to counter a case involving the petitioner's husband. The State's counsel argued that the injuries sustained by the victim were grievous and caused by the petitioner.
Finding of the Court:
The court found sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner and opined that it was not a fit case to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail, ultimately rejecting the bail application.
Issues: The issues involved the petitioner's apprehension of arrest in connection with a criminal case and the consideration of whether pre-arrest bail should be granted based on the arguments presented by both parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the presence of incriminating materials against the petitioner and the nature of the injuries sustained by the victim, leading to the conclusion that it was not a fit case to grant pre-arrest bail.
Final Decision: The court rejected the petitioner's application for pre-arrest bail and disposed off the anticipatory bail application.
JUDGMENT
Ajit Borthakur, J. - Heard Mr. F. Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. B. Gogoi, learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing for the State respondent.
2. This petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is filed for granting the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, namely Khargeswar Rajbongshi apprehending arrest in connection with Palashbari P.S. Case No. 484/2020 u/s 294(a)/326/506/34 of the IPC.
3. The case diary, as called for, is placed before the Court.
4. Mr. F. Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the informant has brought a false accusation against the petitioner just to counter a case wherein her husband is implicated in an incident of making attempt to rape the wife of the petitioner. In this connection, a complaint case being C.R. Case No. 40/2020 is pending trial in the Court of learned CJM, Amingaon. Mr. Khan further submits that there is no ingredient of the offence under Section 326 of the IPC.
5. Mr. B. B. Gogoi, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, submits that the injured Simanta Rajbongshi has sustained multiple injuries caused by sharp weapon and grievous in nature. Mr. Gogoi further submits that the injured has been undergoing treatment in the GMCH and there is clear evidence that the petitioner caused the said injuries.
6. The allegation is that on 30.10.2020 at about 8 p.m., the petitioner, who is the brother-in-law of the informant, consuming liquor inflicted cut injuries on the person of her husband Simanta Rajbongshi at their home.
7. On perusal of the materials on the case diary including the injury report, this Court finds sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner. The investigation is yet to be completed.
8. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.
9. Accordingly, the pre-arrest bail application stands rejected.
Send back the case diary.
This disposes off the anticipatory bail application.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
