An accused petitioner does not forfeit bail conditions if he complies, and the court may extend interim bail even after charge sheet submission if no misuse is alleged.

JUDGMENT

[1] Heard learned counsel representing the accused petitioner. Heard learned PP representing the State respondent.

[2] Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that term of the pre arrest bail granted to the petitioner by an order dated 07.10.2021 will be expiring today. Counsel submits that during the period of interim protection granted to the accused by an ad interim pre arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C, he never misused the concession granted to him. Even there is no allegation against him that he ever extended any threat to any of the witnesses of this case or tried to abscond from the process of the court or from the reach of the investigating agency. Counsel submits that accused has meticulously complied with all conditions which were imposed on him while granting pre arrest bail to him.

[3] Learned PP on the other hand submits that investigation is complete and charge sheet has been submitted by the investigating officer before the court. As such, the accused may be asked to appear before the trial court and submit to the process of the Court.

[4] Perused the record. The period of interim bail granted to the accused under Section 438 CrPC was last extended by this court by order dated 07.10.2021 which reads as under:

[1] Heard Mr. S. Rahman, counsel appearing for the petitioner. Heard Mr. R. Datta, learned P.P. representing the State respondent.

[2] By the last order dated 17.09.2021 interim protection granted to the petitioner was extended till date observing as under:

“[1] By order dated 03.09.2021 petitioner, Koushik Mukherjee was granted pre-arrest bail for an interim period till date. He is an accused in East Agartala P.S Case No.2021 EAG 071 which has been registered against him on the charges punishable under Sections 279 , 304A, 304 Part-II IPC and Sections 184 and 187 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , 1988. Allegations against him are that on 15.06.2021 at around 8.15 a.m. he smashed the father of the informant under the wheels of his speeding car. The factual background of the case has been narrated in the past orders which may be reproduced as under: Doctor Smt. Priyanka Sinha, daughter of Doctor Prasenjit Sinha of Banamali Pur, Agartala lodged a written FIR with the Officer-in-Charge of East Agartala Police Station on 15.06.2021 at around 6.30 P.M. In her FIR Smt. Sinha alleged that on 14.06.2021, her father left home between 7.45 and 8.15 A.M. for offering prayer in the nearby Loknath Ashram. On his way back home, he was walking along his left side of the road. At that time a speeding car bearing registration no.TR-01-AT-0325 hit his father. As a result, her father died at the spot. Driver fled away with his vehicle after the accident. According to her, a delivery boy of Zomato witnessed the accident who had also taken photograph of the offending vehicle. The informant daughter of the deceased further alleged that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle.

[2] Based on her FIR, East Agartala P.S. case No.2021 EAG 071 under Sections 279 & 304A IPC and Sections 184 & 187 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT was registered and the case was taken up for investigation.

[3] By the last order dated 03.09.2021 petitioner was granted pre-arrest bail for an interim period till date under the following conditions:

(i) He will appear at the concerned police station and meet the IO of the case twice in a week during the bail period for the purpose of investigation.

(ii) He will not leave the state without prior approval of the IO.

(iii) He will not try to influence any of the witnesses of the case or tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.

[4] Counsel ap