Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(GAU) 7664
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Susmita Phukan Khaund, J
DR NARMADA HIDANGMAYUM AND ANR – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ASSAM – Respondent
AB / 2462 / 2024
MR. U K DEKA, MS. P BORAH
Pre-arrest bail granted under sufficient grounds despite allegations of cheating, with conditions to ensure cooperation in investigation.
Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 482 - Pre-arrest bail application - Petitioners apprehended arrest in connection with allegations of cheating and criminal breach of trust - Allegation of failure to repay loan for flat purchase - Petitioners contended repayment made and alleged false case by complainant - Sufficient grounds for interim bail identified. (Paras 1-6)
(B) Bail - Conditions - Interim bail granted with conditions to appear before Investigating Officer and not to jump bail - Failure to comply results in cancellation of bail. (Paras 8-9)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners applied for pre-arrest bail under Section 482, alleging that the complainant falsely accused them of not repaying a loan of Rs.15,00,000/- taken to purchase a flat. The petitioners claimed to have made the repayment and highlighted the complainant's failure to supply goods for which a larger sum was paid.
Findings of Court:
The court found sufficient grounds to grant interim bail to the petitioners, considering the circumstances of the case and the allegations made.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioners should be granted pre-arrest bail given the allegations against them.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that sufficient grounds existed for granting bail, emphasizing the need for the petitioners to cooperate with the investigation and the conditions imposed to ensure compliance.
Result: Interim bail granted.
ORDER
16.09.2024 Date :
Heard Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the petitioner Nos. 1. Dr. Narmada Hidangmayum and 2. Salam Adden Singh, who have filed this application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with prayer for pre-arrest bail as they are apprehending arrest in connection with Dispur Police Station Case No. 842/2024 under Sections 420/406/34 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. Heard Mr. D. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the respondent State.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner No. 2 requested the complainant Ajay Bahadur Singh to lend Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lacs) to facilitate the petitioner No. 1 to purchase a flat for Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lacs). The money was lent to the petitioners by the complainant but the petitioners failed to repay the money.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners have stated that the bank statement marked as Annexure-G clearly reveals that on 08.09.2023, and again on 05.10.2023, a total amount of Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lacs) was already paid to the informant. On the contrary, the petitioner No. 2 who had business dealings with the informant paid Rs.4,80,00,000/- (Rupees Four Crore Eighty Lacs) for goods to be supplied to the petitioner No. 2 by the informant Ajay Bahadur Singh but the informant failed to supply the goods and he supplied only for Rs.2,40,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crore Forty Lacs). This impelled the petitioner No. 2 to lodge an FIR against the informant. The FIR is marked as Annexure-C of the petition. Warrant of arrest was issued against the informant, which is marked as Annexure-D. Another warrant of arrest issued against the informant was brought up by another person, which is marked is marked as Annexure-D(1) of the petition. After the informant was granted bail in several criminal cases in the State of Nagaland and Manipur, the informant arrived at Guwahati and to wreck vengeance, he brought up this case against the petitioners.
5. It is submitted that there is no direct allegation against the petitioner No. 1 but a false case has been instituted against the petitioner No. 2.
6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised objection against the prayer for interim bail. However, it appears that there are sufficient grounds to grant interim bail to the petitioners.
7. Call for the Case Diary.
8. Meanwhile, in the interim and in the event of their arrests, the petitioners shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) each with a local surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority under the conditions that :-
(i) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within one week and cooperate with the investigation.
(ii) The petitioner shall not jump the bail.
9. On breach of any of the bail conditions, interim bail order shall stand cancelled.
10. List the matter on 25.10.2024.
