ORDER

24.08.2022 Heard Mr. A. Chamuah, learned counsel and Mr. N. K. Kalita, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. B. B. Gogoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, State of Assam.

nd By this two 2 bail application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. the petitioners, namely, Sri Nitin Beria in AB/2009/2022 and Sri Bikash Beria in AB/2003/2022, have prayed for granting pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Crime Branch PS Case No. 12/2021 under Sections 120(B)/420 IPC read with Section 13/14 of the Assam Game and Betting Act, 1970.

While the petitioners had approached this Court on earlier occasion, initially this Court granted interim protection vide order dated 13.12.2021 in AB/4171/2021 and AB/4172/2021. Thereafter, it was alleged that in spite of direction given by this Court to appear before the I.O. and record their statements, this two petitioners did not appear before the I.O., however, when this Court extended time to appear then before the I.O., they have appeared and recorded their statements.

The Case Diary further reveals that the mobile phone alleged to have been used for batting in IPL, has also been recovered from the petitioners. However, this Court vide order dated 24.02.2022, dismissed the Anticipatory Bail on the ground that the petitioners had not appeared before the Investigating Agency. after they were granted interim protection and that the case diary reveals that they had send a copy of the interim order to the Investigating Agency without any further action although condition was imposed in bail order dated 13.12.2021, to appear the petitioners before the Investigating Agency within seven days.

Mr. Chamuah, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though their bail petitions were rejected on the ground of alleged formatting of the mobile phone, he submits that the mobile phone has already been recovered from the petitioners by the Investigating Agency and the data can very well be recovered even if mobile is formatted.

He further submits that the offences were committed through a website i.e.

WWW.skyexchange.com and the petitioners are not the owners of the said website. Mr. Chamuah, further submits that this offences are petty offences being punishable less than three years and in view of the recent decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Satender Kumar Antil –Vs- Central Bureau of Investigation decided on 11.07.2022. reported in 2022 SCC Online SC

825., the petitioners are entitled for bail.

I have perused the materials available on record and considering the recent judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court and also considering the I.O.s note which reflects that the petitioners statements has been recorded and no incriminating materials were found, is of the considered opinion that, at this stage, custodial detention of the petitioners are not necessary. Accordingly, the prayer of bail is allowed.

In the event of arrest of the petitioners, above named, in connection with Crime Branch Police Station Case No. 12/2021, they shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- each with one local surety of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject to the conditions that:-

1. The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer of the case within a period of 7 (seven) days from today and shall cooperate with the investigation of the case;

2. The petitioners 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and

3. The petitioners shall not hamper with the investigation or tamper with the evidence of the case.

This two bail applications are disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant