Research › Search › Judgment

Tripura High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 209 (TRI)

Nibash Das v. State of Tripura

2022-04-27

S.G.CHATTOPADHYAY

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. This is an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr. P. C hereunder) for granting pre-arrest bail to accused petitioners Nibash Das and his brother Tapash Das in Amtali Police Station Case No.2022 AMT 029 which has been registered for investigation under Sections 120B, 458 326, 427 read with Section 34 IPC. 2. The genesis of the prosecution case is rooted in the First Information Report (FIR hereinafter) lodged by one Pritam Roy, son of Sri Narayan Roy of Netaji Nagar, Amtali. By lodging a written FIR with the Officer-in-Charge, Amtali police station on 28.02.2022 said Sri Pritam Roy brought several allegations against the two accused petitioners. The first informant alleged, inter alia, that on 27.02.2022 at about 10 O' clock in the night the two accused along with others deliberately attacked Amit Chowhan, a neighbour of the informant, with sharp edged weapons and assaulted said Sri Amit Chowhan and his wife. As a result of their attack, Amit Chowhan received cut injury in his hand. Thereafter the accused assailants damaged the pulsar motor bike of the informant which was kept parked in front of the house of said Amit Chowhan. Sri Tanmoy Chakraborty, friend of the informant was then standing on the nearby road along with Sri Rohit Roy at the material time. The accused petitioners did not also spare them. They assaulted said Tanmoy Chakraborty and Rohit Roy and caused injuries to them. The accused petitioners also broke open the door of the house of Abhijit Debnath and after entering into his house they ransacked the belongings in the house of said Abhijit Debnath. The injured were immediately taken to hospital for treatment. 3. This FIR lodged by Pritam Roy was registered as Amtali P.S Case No.029 of 2022 under Sections 120B, 458, 326, 427 and 34 IPC and investigation of the case was taken up by police. 4. Subsequently, on 4.3.2022 accused petitioner Nibash Das lodged another complaint at Amtali police station, alleging, inter alia, that during the same incident on 27.02.2022 at about 9.30 pm he saw his accused brother Tapash Das and his neighbours Abhijit Debnath, Tanmoy Chakraborty, Surajit Chowhan and Pritam Dey were quarreling with each other at a place in their neighbourhood. He then tried to dissuade them from quarrelling with each other. He then tried to dissuade them from quarrelling with each other. At that time Abhijit Debnath attack him with a broken piece of glass and caused cut injury to his head. When he went to save his brother Tapash Das, accused Tanmoy Chakraborty hit him on his head with his helmet and accused Pritam started giving him feast blows. His neighbours rescued him and his brother and brought them to hospital. 5. FIR lodged by accused petitioner Nibash Das was registered as Amtali P.S Case No.032 of 2022 under Section 325 read with Section 34 IPC and the same was also taken up for investigation. 6. It would appear from the facts aforesaid that police registered two FIRs on the same incident. As stated, the first FIR was lodged by Pritam Roy against the accused petitioner and others on 28.02.2022 and three days thereafter the second FIR was lodged by accused petitioner Nibash Das who was one of the prime accused in the FIR lodged by Pritam Roy. Similarly, Pritam Roy is one of the prime accused in the FIR lodged by accused petitioner Nibash Das. 7. I have heard Mr. P. Sen Choudhury, learned advocate appearing for the accused petitioners as well as Mr. Ratan Datta, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State respondent along with Mr. S. Ghosh, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor. 8. It is contended by Mr. P. Sen Choudhury, learned counsel that the facts of the case would clearly demonstrate that the incident occurred among the neighbours owing to their past enmity which resulted in case and counter case. Counsel submits that none of the injured received any grievous hurt so as to include Section 326 IPC in the case. Counsel contends that the accused petitioners are absolutely innocent. Accused Nibash Das actually went to the place of occurrence to save his brother Tapash who got involved in an altercation with Pritam and his associates. Counsel contends that both of the petitioners have their families and their detention without justifiable ground would spoil their life. Counsel contends that the accused petitioners would extend the fullest cooperation to the investigating agency to unearth the crime. The counsel therefore, urges the court to enlarge them on pre-arrest bail. 9. Counsel contends that both of the petitioners have their families and their detention without justifiable ground would spoil their life. Counsel contends that the accused petitioners would extend the fullest cooperation to the investigating agency to unearth the crime. The counsel therefore, urges the court to enlarge them on pre-arrest bail. 9. Learned State counsel representing the prosecution on the other hand contends that in view of the seriousness of the offence and the manner in which it was committed, the petitioners do not deserve anticipatory bail. Counsel therefore, urges the Court to reject their bail application. 10. Perused the entire record including the case diary produced by the Public Prosecutor. Considered the submissions made by the counsel representing the parties. Admittedly, no action has been taken against Pritam Roy and his associates who were made accused in the case lodged by Sri Nibash Das, one of the present petitioners. Undisputedly, two FIRs have been registered by police for investigation one of which has been lodged by the present accused petitioner and the other has been lodged by Pritam Roy. The said FIRs indicate that the parties quarreled with each other and thereafter they reported the matter to police by lodging separate FIRs. The medical reports contained in the case diary would indicate that the persons who were allegedly assaulted received simple injuries from the said incident. It is not denied that the accused petitioners also received the injuries from the said incident. The incident occurred on 27.02.2022 and by this time the investigating agency has recorded the police statements of most of the witnesses. Perused those statements. A detailed discussion of the materials available on record may not be appropriate at this stage. Suffice it to say that the materials available on record do not justify the arrest and detention of the petitioners. Therefore, this court is of the view that both the petitioners may be granted pre arrest bail for an interim period of two weeks subject to certain conditions. Accordingly, it is directed that accused petitioners namely, Nibash Das and his brother Tapash Das, in the event of their arrest, shall be released on pre-arrest bail on their furnishing bail bond of a sum of Rs. Accordingly, it is directed that accused petitioners namely, Nibash Das and his brother Tapash Das, in the event of their arrest, shall be released on pre-arrest bail on their furnishing bail bond of a sum of Rs. 25,000/- each with one surety of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer till 11.05.2022 on the following conditions: (i) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer at Amtali Police Station once in a week unless otherwise required by the I.O. (ii) They will not do anything to influence any of the witnesses of this case during the investigation of the case or temper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever. 11. Learned Public Prosecutor will produce the updated case diary on the next date. List the matter on 11.05.2022.