Page No.# 1/4 vs The State Of Assam
2022 Latest Caselaw 4734 Gua

                                                                  Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010186782022




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

                               Case No. : Bail Appln./2425/2022

            MAHESH MARDI AND ANR.
            S/O SRI BIREN MARDI
            R/O KOILABARI GAON
            P.O. AND P.S. CHABUA
            PIN-786184
            DIST. DIBRUGARH, ASSAM

            2: SHRI RAMESH SOREN
             SON OF SRI LAKHIRAM SOREN
            R/O KOILABARI GOAN
            P.O. AND P.S. CHABUA
            PIN-786484
             DIST. DIBRUGARH
            ASSAM

            3: SHRI ROMEN SOREN
             SON OF SHRI BULU SOREN
            R/O KOILABARI GOAN
            P.O. AND P.S. CHABUA
            PIN- 786184
             DIST. DIBRUGARH
            ASSA

            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM
            REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM



Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. P J SAIKIA, SR. ADV

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
                                                                        Page No.# 2/4




                                  BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR

                                     ORDER

01.12.2022

Heard Ms. M. Nirola, learned counsel appearing for the accused petitioners as well as Ms. S. H. Borah, learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing for the State respondent.

By this second petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the accused-petitioners, namely, 1. Mahesh Mardi 2.Ramesh Soren 3. Romen Soren have prayed for grant of bail in connection with Sessions Case No.67/2020 registered under Section 120(B)/147/148 /323/302/149 of the IPC.

The scanned copy of case record along with case diary, as called for, is placed before the Court.

It may be mentioned that by order, dated 16.08.2021, this Court rejected the bail application of the petitioners in BA No. 1842/2021.

Ms. M. Nirola, learned counsel for the accused petitioners submits that the accused petitioners have been facing trial under Sections 120B/147/148/149/323/302/149 of the IPC vide the charges framed on 21.10.2020 and despite they are being detained in judicial custody for the purpose of trial for last 2½ years, but only 9 (nine) prosecution witnesses out of 24 (twenty four) listed witnesses are examined. Ms. Nirola, learned counsel further submits that the examination of the remaining prosecution witnesses is likely to be delayed. Therefore, Ms. Nirola, learned counsel submits that subject to any condition as has been imposed while granting bail to the four co-accused Page No.# 3/4

persons, the present accused petitioners' case may also be considered favourably.

Per contra, Ms. S. H. Borah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that as substantial number of listed prosecution witnesses is yet to be examined by the prosecution, release of the present accused petitioners may likely to hamper a smooth and early disposal of the case which is pending trial from the year 2020.

The prosecution case in brief is that on 23.05.2020 when the informant and his friends went to the bye pass road at Koliabari, a group of 25 to 30 persons attacked him and his friends with sharp weapons injuring one of his friends, who later succumbed to his injuries on the next morning.

It is noticed that the accused persons have been in judicial custody from the month of May, 2020 and after investigation, the investigating officer laid a charge-sheet on 19.08.2020 and further, the learned trial court after hearing of both sides and perusal of the materials on record framed the charges as stated above vide order, dated 21.10.2020, against the present two accused petitioners and nine others. There is a list of twenty four witnesses in the charge-sheet and out of them only nine witnesses are examined by the prosecution during the aforesaid period of 2½ years. Therefore, it is significantly noticed that it would invariably take a longer period to complete examination of the remaining prosecution witnesses. As such, this Court is of the considered opinion that further continuation of detention of the accused petitioners indefinitely would be an injustice and hence, they may be allowed to be released on bail subject to stringent conditions despite some incriminating evidence have come up against them.

Accordingly, it is provided that the accused petitioners, named above, shall Page No.# 4/4

be released on bail of Rs. 50,000/- each with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge/ Sessions Judge, Dibrugarh subject to the following conditions-

(i) That the accused petitioners shall continue to appear before the learned trial court on all dates to be fixed from time to time till the case is disposed of.

(ii) That the accused petitioners 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 them from disclosing such facts to the court.

Be it mentioned that breach of any of the above conditions of bail shall render their bail cancelled in accordance with law.

Be it further mentioned that any observation made in the course of this order shall not have any bearing on the independent discretion of the learned trial court while writing the judgment.

This disposes of the bail application.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant