ORDER

24.06.2022 Heard Mr. M. Biswas, learned counsel for the accused petitioner as well as Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State respondent.

By this petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the accused petitioner, namely, Satya Saran Dutta has prayed for grant of bail in connection with Palashbari P.S. Case No. 149/2022 u/s 468/471/420/34 of the IPC read with Section

64 of the Indian Stamp Act.

The case diary, as called for, is placed before the Court.

Mr. M. Biswas, learned counsel for the accused petitioner, submits that the accused, who is a Lat Mandal, had prepared the report in question based on the required documents supplied by the party, which applied for permission for sale of the land. Mr. Biswas, therefore, submits that the accused cannot be said to have forged the relevant documents/report.

Opposing the bail application, Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, submits that the case diary reveals that the accused, who is a Lat Mandal, in collusion with other co-accused persons prepared a false report after making a field verification of the disputed plot of land himself and submitted report to the Circle Officer, Palashbari to issue NOC for sale permission in favour of the applicant.

The brief facts of the case are that on 12.04.2022, an F.I.R. was lodged by one Nitul Baruah before the Superintendent of Police, Kamrup, stating, inter- alia, that two persons viz., Kandarpa Boruah and Joydeb Bora visited his house on 12.02.2022 and requested him to sell his land situated at Village Bangara under Palashbari Revenue Circle for an amount of Rs.7.5 lakhs, to which the informant refused. Later, it came to the knowledge of the informant that the said plot of land had been transferred in the name of one Tapan Mali on 20.02.2022 vide Sale Deed No. 989/2022 and Namjari had been done through the Circle Office, Palashbari. The Sale Deed was shown to be executed by the father of the informant, who died long ago on 06.12.2015. As such, the Sale Deed, mutation etc. were done by way of forged documents and signatures.

It is noticed that the accused is under judicial custody since 05.05.2022 that is, for 50 days.

A perusal of the case diary, it is revealed that the plot of land in question was mutated in the name of an arrested accused based on forged signature of the informant’s father and his PAN Card, who expired on 06.12.2015 showing him to be alive. The aforesaid transactions were prima facie made by the arrested applicant in connivance with other associates, who managed to obtain NOC for the purpose, initially based on a concocted report of the accused Lat Mandal. The investigation into the case is yet to be completed. The connected documents are now missing from the Circle Officer’s office.

Therefore, on consideration of the nature of role played by the accused Lat Mandal in the above noted transactions and the length of detention (50 days), this Court is of the opinion that if the liberty of bail is granted to the accused petitioner, the ongoing investigation is unlikely to be adversely affected.

Accordingly, it is directed that the accused petitioner, named above, shall be released on bail of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Kamrup, Amingaon subject to the following conditions-

(i) That the accused petitioner shall cooperate with the investigating officer as and when required;

(ii) That the accused petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Police Officer or the Court; and (iii) That the accused petitioner shall not deal with any official document/file relevant to the case till completion of investigation.

Return the case diary.

The bail application stands disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant