Back
2024 Supreme(Gau) 918
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH, ITANAGAR BENCH
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE, J.
Morge Nochi - Petitioner
Versus
The State of A.P., Represented by the PP of AP - Respondent
BA No. 52 of 2024
Decided On : 03-06-2024
For the Petitioner: Dugmar Kamduk, K. Eshi, M. Ete, L. Tadam, M. Ratan.
For the Respondent: Mr. T. Ete, Addl. P. (A.P).
IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that the seriousness of the charges does not automatically preclude the granting of bail, and that personal liberty must be preserved unless there are compelling reasons to deny it.
Headnote:
BAIL - POST ARREST BAIL APPLICATION - Cr.P.C. 1973, Section 439; IPC Sections 302, 120(B), 507, 34 - The court discussed the provisions of Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. regarding bail, emphasizing that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, as per Article 21 of the Constitution. The court also referenced the seriousness of the charges under IPC Sections 302 and 120(B), interpreting that while the nature of the accusations is significant, it should not solely dictate the denial of bail. The court highlighted the importance of personal liberty and the presumption of innocence, ultimately deciding that the accused could be granted bail due to the completion of the investigation and the absence of a risk of tampering with evidence.
Fact of the Case:
The accused, Shri Toni Lollen, was arrested in connection with the murder of his wife, Ms. Juli Ruchi, following allegations of domestic abuse and a violent confrontation. The prosecution's case was based on a detailed FIR and CCTV evidence indicating the accused's presence during the incident. The accused sought bail after being in custody for over five months, arguing that the investigation was complete and there was no risk of tampering with evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that while there was prima facie evidence against the accused, including CCTV footage, the seriousness of the charges alone could not justify the continued denial of bail. The court noted that the trial had not yet commenced, and the accused had been in custody for an extended period without any indication of tampering with evidence or fleeing.
Issues: Whether the accused should be granted bail considering the serious nature of the charges against him and the principles governing bail applications under the Cr.P.C.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the principles of personal liberty and the presumption of innocence must be weighed against the seriousness of the charges. It emphasized that bail should not be denied solely based on the gravity of the offense, especially when the accused had been in custody for a significant time and the investigation was complete.
Final Decision: The court granted bail to Shri Toni Lollen, subject to specific conditions, allowing him to be released on a bond of Rs.30,000 with one surety, while ensuring he would not leave the jurisdiction or contact witnesses.
JUDGMENT :
Kardak Ete, J.
Heard Mr. D. Kamduk, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. T. Ete, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This is a bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., 1973, praying for release of the accused, namely, Shri Toni Lollen, on post arrest bail in connection with the Aalo P.S. Case No.74/2023 under Sections 302/120(B)/507/34 IPC, who was arrested on 05.12.2023.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on 05.12.2023, at 1700 Hours a written F.I.R. was filed by one Smti Yari Ruchi to the effect that her deceased daughter namely, Ms. Juli Ruchi, aged about 25 (twenty-five) years got married to the accused Shri Toni Lollen in the year 2020 and started living with him and after few months, the accused started torturing her daughter. On 04.12.2023, the elder sister of the deceased Ms. Yapi Ruchi received a phone call from the deceased at around 1730 hours and informed that first wife of the accused had arrived at her residence and forcefully asked the deceased to vacate her residence. Again, at around 1825 hours, the deceased told her elder sister that the accused had verbally warned her to vacate the residence and further the first son of the accused had warned the deceased not to give birth to any male child as it would divide his share in the property. It is also alleged that the first wife of the accused had also called her elder brother, namely, Shri Lidu Ruchi, warning that he must take his sister back from his residence. Further, the deceased made a call to her brother that she has been brutally assaulted and sustained injury in her person. Lastly, at 0100 hours, she received a call from the Police that her daughter has been brought dead at General Hospital, Aalo. Upon reaching there, she found that her daughter’s cloth was full of blood with grievous injury marks on upper back, shoulder till abdomen, bruises on right hand, face and neck and the deceased was bleeding from lower abdomen.
4. On receipt of the information, initially a case was registered being Aalo P.S. Case No. 74 of 2023 under Sections 306/34. Thereafter, on the information of the accused Shri Toni Lollen, a UD Case vide Aalo P.S. U.D. Case No. 05/2023 under Section 174 Cr.P.C. was registered. After completion of the investigation, the Police has laid down the Charge-sheet No. 02/2024, under Sections 302/120(B)/506/34 IPC against the accused Shri Toni Lollen and 3 (three) others. The Investigating Authority has prayed for omission of Section 306 and rescind the UD Case as mentioned above. There are 14 (fourteen) numbers of prosecution witnesses to be examined during the trial. It is informed that the trial is in the stage of consideration of charges.
5. Mr. D. Kamduk, learned counsel for the applicant, submits that the alleged accused person and the victim Lt. Juli Ruchi had a love affair and was supposed to solemnized their marriage in the month of December, 2024. The first wife of the accused has never objected to the second marriage and she had only objected regarding the transfer of property in the name of victim Lt. Juli Ruchi as the accused and the first wife have one son out of their wedlock. On her protest, the accused revealed that the brother of the victim was forcing him to transfer the property in her name if they desired to marry. Therefore, the first wife had to make a phone call to the brother of the victim and had some argument with him. The accused and the victim had an argument after the first wife and his son left the place. The accused had also left the place after an argument with the victim. The accused after coming back, found the door locked from inside and he kicked the door till it opened up and when he entered the room, he found the deceased hanging from the ceiling fan. The accused had informed the incident to his cousin brother and they have rushed to the Police Station and reported the incident. Thereafter, the mother of the victim had lodged an FIR on 05.12.2023 against the
