Niraj Kumar Sarmah @ Pinku vs The State Of Assam
2021 Latest Caselaw 1779 Gua

                                                                                         Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010115512021




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

                                      Case No. : AB/2191/2021

             NIRAJ KUMAR SARMAH @ PINKU
             S/O LATE NAGENDRA NATH SARMAH, R/O KRISHNA NAGAR,
             CHANDMARI, NEAR HOLY CHILD SCHOOL, P.S. CHANDMARI, DIST.
             KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, PIN 781003



             VERSUS

             THE STATE OF ASSAM
             REPRESENTED BY PP, ASSAM.



Advocate for the Petitioner     : MR A D CHOUDHURY

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM


                                               BEFORE
                      HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN
                                       ORDER

05.08.2021 By this pre-arrest bail application under Section 438 CrPC, petitioner, namely, Sri Niraj Kumar Sarmah @ Pinku, has sought for bail in the event of his arrest in connection with CID PS Case No. 09/2010, under Section 120(B)/420/468/471 of the IPC.

Heard the learned counsel for both the parties.

Also perused the record and the documents annexed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to the different documents annexed and submitted that the matter pertains to the year 2010 and in the meantime, the petitioner was served notices on two occasions, i.e., on 25.05.2015 and on 02.02.2018, to appear before the IO. Accordingly, he appeared before the IO and gave his statement and till now, no charge sheet has been Page No.# 2/2

submitted but the petitioner has again been searched by the IO.

It is further submitted that on the similar accusations, the same informant filed a case under Section 138 of the NI Act, against the petitioner vide CR Case No. 1229/2010 (Sri Thoiba Singh -vs- Sri Niraj Kumar Sarmah @ Pinku) and the judgment of the learned trial Court, dated 12.10.2015, reveals the real story that the informant projected a case on false pretext and the petitioner was acquitted from the said case.

I have gone through the documents annexed.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised his objection and has sought for obtaining instructions from the IO.

It is to be noted that a matter of 2010 is still pending without completion of investigation. Let the Case Diary be called for, along with the status report of the case, fixing the matter in the second week of September, 2021.

Considering all entirety of the matter, the petitioner is allowed to go on interim pre-arrest bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/-, with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority in the event of his arrest in connection with the aforesaid case, with a direction to appear before the IO within a period of 15 days from today and record his statement afresh.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant