IMPORTANT POINT
The relevance of the accused's statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. in considering the prima facie case against him in a bail application for a grave offence.

JUDGMENT

1. Heard Mr. J. Shylla, learned counsel for the petitioner who has submitted that an FIR dated 14.01.2022 was lodged before the Ladrymbai Police Out Post, East Jaintia Hills District by one Shri Md Rafiqul Ali informing the police that he is the owner of one Bolero pickup Truck No. AS-01-JC-3947 which was driven by one Shri. Bidya Dawa Dutta. The informant has also informed that he received a phone call from the Ladrymbai Police Out Post that a suspected burnt body found from a place called Moowakhu Dkhiah West, East Jaintia Hills suspected to be that of his driver since the vehicle was found abandoned at another place.

2. The informant along with the relative of the driver went to Khliehriat CHC and identified the dead body as that of the deceased driver. It is prayed that necessary action be taken as per law. Accordingly, the police registered a criminal case being Khliehriat P.S. Case No. 5 (1) of 2022 under Section 302/34 IPC.

3. The accused Shri. Lodestar Tang, son of the petitioner herein was strongly suspected to be involved in the crime and was arrested on 03.04.2022. It is also mentioned that on an earlier occasion, the said accused had approached this Court for grant of anticipatory bail, but the same was rejected vide order dated 24.02.2022.

4. On investigation launched by the Investigating Officer and on completion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer had submitted the charge sheet on 02.05.2022 wherein the accused, son of the petitioner and three other persons namely, Shri. Shidorki Dkhar, Shri. Kyrshan Timung and Shri. Pher Dhar were named as accused. It is also submitted that of the four, only the accused, son of the petitioner and Shri. Shidorki Dkhar were arrested while Shri. Kyrshan Timung and Shri. Pher Dhar were never arrested. The matter was committed before the Session Court at Khliehriat and is pending for attendance of all the accused persons.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the petitioner has moved a bail application before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Khliehriat, but the same was rejected vide order dated 11.07.2022. Again, a bail application was moved before the Sessions Court at Khliehriat, but this too was rejected vide order dated 19.07.2022. The petitioner has then preferred this instant application before this Court with a prayer for grant of bail to the accused Shri. Lodestar Tang.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that a perusal of the charge sheet would show that there is no direct evidence linking the accused, son of the petitioner to the alleged crime, but only circumstantial evidence is relied upon by the I/O to implicate the said accused in the case. The accused infact has stated before the I/O that on the date of the alleged commission of the crime, he was not in the vicinity of the place of occurrence, but was far away in his village.

7. The next contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the prosecution has given a lists of twenty-two witnesses to be examined in the case and also considering the fact that two of the accused persons have not yet been apprehended, therefore there is every likelihood that the trial will take a considerable amount of time which will affect the personal liberty and right to life of the accused person and which will also hamper the opportunity to prepare his defence in the case.

8. The accused person even if released on bail would not be able to tamper with the evidence or witnesses as the period of investigation is already over and there is no possibility for tampering with any material witness or even the witnesses.

9. In view of the fact that the accused person is the only earning member of his family with his wife and child depending on him for their livelihood, it is prayed that bail may be granted with any conditions that this Court may deem fit to impose.

10. Per contra, Mr. B. Bhattacharjee, learned AAG has submitted that the factum of the incident which has l