Pre-arrest bail can be granted if custodial interrogation is deemed unnecessary, balancing rights of personal liberty with investigation needs.

JUDGMENT

[1] This bail application under Section 438 Cr. P.C was first considered on 04.06.2021 when after hearing the parties at length the following order was passed:

“[1] This is an application filed under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C hereunder) preferred by the accused applicants for granting pre arrest bail to them in West Agartala Women P.S case No. 40/2021 which has been registered under sections 498A, 323, 307 read with section 34 IPC.

[2] The accused applicant Litan Saha is the husband of the complainant and co-accused applicant Smt. Manika Saha is her sister-in-law (husband’s sister).

[3] This case has been registered on the basis of the written Fir lodged by Smt. Beauti Saha at West Agartala Women P.S on 30.04.2021 alleging, inter alia, that her accused husband Litan Saha used to commit torture on her for dowry right from the beginning of their marital life. On 29.04.2021 the accused husband assaulted the complainant and tried to kill her by throttling. Their eleven years old daughter came forward and saved her mother.

[4] Mr. S. Rahaman, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that accused husband sells vegetables and fruits in a market. They entered into matrimonial alliance about 13 years back and two children were born to them during this period. It is also submitted by Mr. Rahaman, learned counsel that the complainant wife never made any allegations against her husband in the past though according to her the accused husband is harassing her for the last 12 years. According to Mr. Rahaman, learned counsel, the occurrence took place at the spur of the moment. Therefore, arrest and detention of the accused should be prevented to save the matrimonial relationship between the parties. For the other accused, it is submitted by Mr. Rahaman, learned counsel that she is the married sister of accused Litan Saha who lives in her matrimonial home and she does not have any role in the occurrence. Learned counsel, therefore, urges the court for granting pre arrest bail to both the accused petitioners.

[5] Mr. R. Datta, learned P.P. on the other hand argues that the investigating agency has by this time recorded the police statements of the material witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C whose statements have revealed that as a result of the continuing dispute between the husband and wife the accused tortured his wife and ousted her from her matrimonial home. According to learned P.P, release of the accused on bail at this stage is likely to spoil the investigation of the case.

[6] Considered the submissions made by learned counsel representing the parties. Perused the case diary as well as the materials placed before this court.

[7] As stated above, the parties were married 13 years back. Two children are born to them during this period.

[8] In view of the nature of the dispute and the facts and circumstances presented before this court, I am of the view that custodial interrogation of the accused is not necessary in the given case. Therefore, in the event of arrest, the accused petitioners may go on bail on their furnishing a bail bond of Rs.20,000/- each with one surety of like amount each to the satisfaction of the investigating officer for an interim period till 23.06.2021 subject to the following conditions:

(i) That petitioner Litan Saha will appear before the investigating officer as and when called for.

(ii) He will not leave the state without prior permission of the investigating officer.

[9] Matter will be further listed on 23.06.2021. Return the case diary to Mr. R. Datta, learned P.P.”

[2] The matter was again heard on 23.06.2021 and the interim protection grante