Research › Search › Judgment

Meghalaya High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 227 (MEG)

Rahul Masih v. State of Meghalaya

2022-08-24

W.DIENGDOH

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. Heard Mr. A. S. Siddiqui, learned Sr. counsel along with Ms. M. K. Sah, learned counsel for the petitioner who has submitted that the petitioner has been summoned by the police to appear at the Nongthymmai Beat House on the strength of a notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C. Accordingly, he appeared at the said Beat House on 05.08.2022. This is in connection with Rynjah P.S Case No. 117(07) of 2022. 2. Again, the petitioner received another notice under Section 41 A dated 11.08.2022 directing him to appear before the Laitumkhrah Police Station on 16.08.2022 in connection with Laitumkhrah P.S Case no. 90(07) 2020, later corrected to 90(07) 2022 under Section 454/380 IPC. 3. The petitioner had appeared before the police on both occasions and has also got his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. 4. However, the petitioner alleged that the police kept harassing him by calling for his presence from time to time causing him to apprehend likelihood of arrest at any point of time. 5. It is further submitted that the petitioner being a college student, is not at all involved in the criminal case under investigation and as such, has approached this Court with this application under Section 438 Cr.P.C seeking grant of pre-arrest bail under any conditions deemed fit and proper to be imposed by this Court. 6. It is also submitted that the petitioner, if granted pre-arrest bail shall not abscond or tamper with the evidence and witnesses but shall fully cooperate with the investigating authorities. 7. Again, Mr. Siddiqui has submitted that this Court vide order dated 17.08.2022 has allowed the petitioner to go on interim bail with a direction that he shall not abscond and further to appear before the I/O as and when required, to which the petitioner has fully complied by appearing before the I/O whenever he is required to do so. 8. It is, therefore, prayed that this application may be considered and the petitioner may be allowed to be released on bail in the event of his arrest and the interim bail granted to him may be made absolute. 9. Mr. S. Sengupta, learned Addl. PP has submitted that on being directed, the prosecution has produced the case diary of the two aforementioned cases and as such, this Court on perusal of the same may pass such further and necessary orders. 10. 9. Mr. S. Sengupta, learned Addl. PP has submitted that on being directed, the prosecution has produced the case diary of the two aforementioned cases and as such, this Court on perusal of the same may pass such further and necessary orders. 10. On consideration of the submission made and on perusal of the case diary of Rynjah P.S Case No. 117(07) of 2022 and Laitumkhrah P.S Case No. 90(07) 2022 what is noticed is that, theft has occurred at two separate places on different dates where the informants therein have reported to the police by way of an FIR. The main accused in both these cases is one Shri. Wanstep Lyngdoh. The role of the petitioner as could be seen from the materials available, could be that of a person who has allegedly bought stolen property. Prima facie, the sections of law cited in the said police case would not ipso facto at this stage of the investigation be applicable to the case of the petitioner. 11. It is well settled that while considering an application for grant of pre-arrest bail, the nature and gravity of the offence, the antecedent of the applicant as well as the conditions set out in Section 438 Cr.P.C to be fulfilled by the applicant has to be taken note of by the Court. In this respect, the provisions of Section 438 may be reproduced herein for a better understanding of this. '438. In this respect, the provisions of Section 438 may be reproduced herein for a better understanding of this. '438. Direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest.- [(1) Where any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section that in the event of such arrest he shall be released on bail; and that Court may, after taking into consideration, inter alia, the following factors, namely:- (i) the nature and gravity of the accusation; (ii) the antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether he has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a Court in respect of any cognizable offence; (iii) the possibility of the applicant to flee from justice; and (iv) where the accusation has been made with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by having him so arrested, either reject the application forthwith or issue an interim order for the grant of anticipatory bail: Provided that, where the High Court or, as the case may be, the Court of Session, has not pass any interim order under this sub-section or has rejected the application for grant of anticipatory bail, it shall be opened to an officer in-charge of a police station to arrest, without warrant the applicant on the basis of the accusation apprehended in such application. (1A) Where the Court grants an interim order under sub-section (1), it shall forthwith cause a notice being not less than seven days notice, together with a copy of such order to be served on the Public Prosecutor and the Superintendent of Police, with a view to give the Public Prosecutor a reasonable opportunity of being heard when the application shall be finally heard by the Court. (1B) The presence of the applicant seeking anticipatory bail shall be obligatory at the time of final hearing of the application and passing of final order by the Court, if on an application made to it by the Public Prosecutor, the Court considers such presence necessary in the interest of justice.] (2) When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction under sub-section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it may thinks fit, including- (i) condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) a condition that the person 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; (iv) such other condition as may be imposed under sub-section (3) of section 437, as if the bail were granted under that section. (3) If such person is thereafter arrested without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station on such accusation, and is prepared either at the time of arrest or at any time while in the custody of such officer to give bail, he shall be released on bail, and if a Magistrate taking cognizance of such offence decides that a warrant should issue in the first instance against that person, he shall issue a bailable warrant in conformity with the direction of the Court under sub-section (1). [(4) Nothing in this section shall apply to any case involving the arrest of any person on accusation of having committed an offence under sub-section (3) of section 376 or section 376AB or section 376DA or section 376DB of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).]' 12. In the light of the above, this Court is inclined to allow this application and accordingly the petitioner is hereby granted pre-arrest bail. In the event of his arrest, the police are directed to release the petitioner who shall then comply with the following conditions, that: i. he shall not abscond or tamper with the evidence and witnesses; ii. In the light of the above, this Court is inclined to allow this application and accordingly the petitioner is hereby granted pre-arrest bail. In the event of his arrest, the police are directed to release the petitioner who shall then comply with the following conditions, that: i. he shall not abscond or tamper with the evidence and witnesses; ii. he shall not leave the jurisdiction of India without prior permission of the I/O or the court concerned; iii. he shall produce a personal bond of ? 30,000/- (rupees thirty thousand) only with one solvent surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the authorities concerned; iv. he shall cooperate with the investigation as and when required. 13. The interim bail granted is hereby made absolute. The Registry is directed to return the case diary. 14. This application is accordingly disposed of. No costs.