Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 131 (GAU)

Paresh Saikia v. State Of Assam

2022-02-11

MANISH CHOUDHURY

body2022
JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Mr. P. Hazarika, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner and Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State of Assam. 2. By this application under Section 439, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the accused-petitioner viz. Sri Paresh Saikia has prayed for his release on bail in connection with Narayanpur Police Station Case no. 152/2021, registered for offence under Section 376, Indian Penal Code [IPC]. 3. After registration of the case on 23.11.2021, the accused-petitioner was apprehended and produced before the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lakhimpur on 24.11.2021 and since then, he is in custody. 4. In the First Information Report [FIR] lodged by the informant, it has inter alia been alleged that at around 08:30 p.m. in a night, when the informant was on her way to her house from the house of her brother-in-law, the accused-petitioner had committed rape upon her. It has been stated that when she raised hue and cry, several persons including her daughter-in-law came to the place and rescued her. 5. Mr. Hazarika, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner has submitted that the informant and the accused-petitioner are co-villagers and since a number of years, the two families are not having good relationship in connection with some land dispute. He has submitted that the informant has instituted the case falsely to harass the accused-petitioner and his family members. He has stressed on the point that the informant is aged bout 70 years whereas the accused-petitioner is aged about 40 years. 6. Mr. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that he has received the concerned case diary wherein the statement of the informant recorded under section 164, CrPC is available. He has further submitted that the statements of other witnesses are also recorded during the course of investigation and the same are available in the case diary. 7. I have duly considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the materials in the case diary. Though the informant has implicated the accused-petitioner in her statement recorded under Section 164, CrPC to the effect that the accused-petitioner made an attempt to commit sexual assault on the informant when she was alone, the statement of the witnesses go to show that the informant was accompanied by her daughter-in-law on her way to her house. 8. Though the informant has implicated the accused-petitioner in her statement recorded under Section 164, CrPC to the effect that the accused-petitioner made an attempt to commit sexual assault on the informant when she was alone, the statement of the witnesses go to show that the informant was accompanied by her daughter-in-law on her way to her house. 8. Be that as it may, the accused-petitioner is in custody for 80 days since 24.11.2021 and the investigation of the case has substantially progressed. In such view of the matter, this Court is of the considered view that custodial detention of the accused-petitioner for any further period for the purpose of investigation appears not necessary and if the accused petitioner is released on bail, at this stage of investigation, further investigation of the case is not likely to be prejudicially affected, provided he continues to extend his assistance and cooperation in the further investigation of the case. 9. Accordingly, the accused-petitioner is allowed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lakhimpur at North Lakhimpur, subject to the following conditions :- [1] The accused-petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation as and when is presence is called for by the Investigating Officer (I.O.) of the case; [2] The accused-petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer; [3] The accused-petitioner shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police; [4] The accused-petitioner shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lakhimpur at North Lakhimpur without prior permission from the said Court; and [5] The accused-petitioner shall maintain law and order and he shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or of the commission of which he is suspected. This application stands disposed of in the afore-mentioned terms.