Please Log in / Register to access the full text of this judgment and the entire database
(2025) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 20406
Decided on: 10.09.2025
For Petitioner(s):
Mr. Azim H. Laskar, Adv., Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, AOR
For Respondent(s):
Mr. Debojit Borkakati, AOR
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 420, 407, 409, 468, 120(B) – Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 482 -- Cheating and forgery – Anticipatory bail – Appellant has joined the investigation and all forged deeds have been seized -- Court considered that custodial interrogation of the appellant is not necessary and that there is sufficient ground for the appellant to be admitted to an order for grant of bail in anticipation of arrest – Bail allowed.
(Para 3-7)
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. By the impugned judgment and order dated 31st July, 2024, the High Court of Gauhati has rejected the appellant’s prayer for bail in anticipation of arrest.
3. The appellant figures as an accused in P.S. Case No. 375 dated 28th December, 2023 registered with Police Station Gorchuk, West Gauhati. It is alleged in the FIR that the appellant has committed offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 420, 407, 409, 468 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
4. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as the respondent-State.
5. It is not in dispute that the appellant has joined the investigation and all forged deeds have been seized. In such view of the matter and considering the nature of allegations, we are of the considered opinion that custodial interrogation of the appellant is not necessary and that there is sufficient ground for the appellant to be admitted to an order for grant of bail in anticipation of arrest.
6. Accordingly, the impugned judgment and order stands set aside.
7. It is directed that in the event of the appellant being arrested in connection with proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR, he shall be released on bail by the arresting/investigating officer/trial court on terms and conditions to be fixed by the trial court.
8. Needless to observe, the appellant shall continue to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating officer and also co-operate in the ensuing trial. He shall not, directly or indirectly, by inducement, threat or promise, dissuade any person acquainted with the facts of the case from disclosing such facts to any police officer or to the court.
9. It is made clear that in the event the appellant breaches any of the terms and conditions imposed by it, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the appellant.
10. We clarify that the observations made in this order and grant of bail will not be treated as findings on the merits of the case.
11. The appeal is allowed on the above terms.
12. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
Appeal allowed.
********