SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Monuj Poddar vs The State Of Assam on 29 November, 2019

Page No. 1/2

GAHC010268532019

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : AB 3892/2019

1:MONUJ PODDAR
S/O LATE BINDESWARI PODDAR, R/O WARD NO. 8, THANA ROAD, P.S. AND
DIST-NORTH LAKHIMPUR (ASSAM)

VERSUS

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M BISWAS

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

ORDER

Date : 29-11-2019

Heard Mr. M Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Konwar, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

By this application under Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner,
namely, Monuj Poddar has prayed for pre-arrest bail, apprehending his arrest, in connection
with North Lakhimpur P.S. Case No. 1226/2019, registered under Section 354, I.P.C.

Case diary as called for, has been received.

Perused the contents of the FIR dated 09.10.2019 registered as North Lakhimpur P.S. Case
No. 1226/2019 as well as the FIR dated 08.10.2019 registered as North Lakhimpur P.S. Case No.
1222/2019. Also perused the materials available in the case diary.

Pursuant to the interim order dated 04.11.2019, the petitioner has appeared before the
Investigating Officer and his statement has been duly recorded.

Page No. 2/2

Upon due consideration of the materials available in the case diary and the facts projected
in the afore-mentioned 2 (two) FIRs, this Court is of the view that the custodial interrogation of
the present petitioner is not necessary for the purpose of further investigation of the case.

In view of the same, the earlier interim protection of pre-arrest bail granted to the
petitioner by the order dated 04.11.2019 is hereby made absolute, subject to the following
conditions :-

1) The petitioner shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the aforesaid police station,
without prior written permission from its officer-in-charge;

2) The petitioner shall not hamper with the investigation, or tamper with the evidence of
the case;

3) The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or premise to
any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such
facts to the Court or to any Police Officer.

The bail application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Return the case diary.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation