Page No.# 1/3 vs The State Of Assam
2021 Latest Caselaw 1635 Gua

                                                                       Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010093352021




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

                               Case No. : Bail Appln./1296/2021

            PRANJAL KAKATI AND ANR.
            S/O. LT. MRIGEN KAKATI, R/O. VILL. 2 NO. GALIAHATI, BARPETA, ASSAM,
            P.O. BARPETA, P.S. BARPETA, PIN-781314, DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM.

            2: ALAKESH DEKA
             S/O. LT. GANESH CH DEKA
             R/O. VILL. DAHATI
             BARPETA
            ASSAM
             P.O. BARPETA
             P.S. BARPETA
             PIN-781314
             DIST. BARPETA
            ASSAM

            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM
            REP. BY PP, ASSAM.



Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR P P MEDHI

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM




                                     BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA

                                          ORDER

Date : 05-07-2021 Page No.# 2/3

Heard Mr. B. Mahajan, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. T.K. Mishra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

The petitioners namely, Pranjal Kakati and Alakesh Deka has filed this application u/s 439 of the Cr.P.C. praying for bail in connection with Barpeta P.S. Case No. 760/2021, u/s 457/380 of IPC.

This is the second bail application filed by the petitioners after rejection of their first bail prayer by this Hon'ble Court.

The petitioners were employees of the Election Office of Barpeta. It is alleged that they had stolen the amount of Rs. 55,50,300/-, from the Election Office. During the period of investigation, the entire stolen money was recovered. Now, Police has filed a charge-sheet against the petitioners. Earlier this Court found incriminating materials against the petitioners in the case diary and that is the reason why their bail prayer was being rejected. No new ground for bail has been pleaded. Therefore, the Court cannot review its own order.

This time, Mr. Mahajan has relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in AIRONLINE 2019 SC 529. In the aforesaid case, the second bail application of the accused appellant was rejected by the High Court. The Supreme Court allowed the bail of the petitioner on the ground that entire misappropriated amount of money was recovered. The Supreme Court held that even if charge-sheet has been filed, under the said circumstances of the case, further detention of the accused petitioner in judicial custody is not necessary.

Today, after hearing Mr. B. Mahajan, this Court is of the opinion that the judgment given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is applicable in the present case also as here also entire money has already been recovered.

Therefore, in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this Court decides that the petitioners deserves to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail prayer of the petitioners are allowed.

The petitioners namely Pranjal Kakati and Alakesh Deka shall be released on bail of Rs. 25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with a surety of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Barpeta in connection with Barpeta P.S. Case No. 760/2021, u/s 457/380 of IPC.

Page No.# 3/3

The bail application stands disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant