Gauhati High Court
Papul Saikia vs The State Of Assam on 6 December, 2022
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010232102022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/3394/2022
PAPUL SAIKIA
C/O- DUGDHANATH SAIKIA,
VILL- KHARJAN GAON,
P.O- SALIKIHAT, DIST- GOLAGHAT, PIN-785625,
ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP. BY PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR K DAS
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN
ORDER
06.12.2022.
Heard Mr. K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. BB
Gogoi, learned Addl. P.P., Assam for the State respondent.
Apprehending arrest in connection with the Merapani P.S. Case No.77/2022,
under Sections 153-A of the IPC, read with Section 3(1) of the Schedule Castes
and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015),
this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is
Page No.# 2/3
preferred by applicant, namely, Papul Saikia, for grant of pre-arrest bail.
The said case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R., lodged by one Nipen
Sonowal on 30.10.2022, alleging that he has posted some objectionable
comments against the Sonowal Kachari tribes in his facebook handle and
thereby, denigrated the traditional customs of the scheduled tribes.
Mr. K. Das, learned counsel for the applicant submits that though the case is
registered under Section 3(1) of the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (here-in-after referred to as 'the SC & ST
Act'), yet from the perusal of the FIR, no offence under the said Section appears
to be made out against the applicant and as no prima facie case is made out
against the applicant under the said section of law, this application under
Section 438 CrPC is maintainable, in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme
Court, in the case of Prithvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India , reported in 2020 SCC
OnLine SC 159, and that the applicant immediately after making such comment,
begged apology from the Sonowal Kacharitribes and that he is ready to
cooperate with the investigating agency and therefore, it is contended to allow
the petition.
On the other hand, Mr. BB Gogoi, learned Addl. P.P., Assam by producing the
case diary before the Court submits that the I.O. has collected sufficient
materials against the applicant and therefore, it is contended to dismiss the bail
petition.
Having heard the submissions of learned Advocates of both sides, I have
carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and
also perused the Case Diary produced before this Court, with the assistance of
Mr. Gogoi, learned Addl. P.P., Assam.
Page No.# 3/3
In view of the materials collected so far in the Case Diary and also in view of the
submission so advanced at the bar, this Court is left unimpressed by the
submission of learned Addl. P.P., Assam that the custodial interrogation of the
applicant is necessary in the interest of investigation.
Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the applicant, namely,
Papul Saikia, in connection with Merapani P.S. Case No.77/2022, he shall be
enlarged on interim pre-arrest bail on executing a bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees
twenty five thousand) only, with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of
the arresting authority.
The above privilege is, however, subject to the following conditions:
(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the
Investigating Officer as and when required;
(ii) that the applicant 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; and
(iii) that the applicant shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned CJM,
Golaghat, without prior permission.
In terms of above, this anticipatory bail application stands disposed of.
The Case Diary be sent back.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
